The Development of the Dual Paradigm in Arabic

Al-AʿrabiyyaJournal of the American Association of Teachers of Arabic

العربيةمجلة رابطة أساتذة اللغة العربية

Volume 46 | 2013

00i-140_Al-Arabiyya_46_1p.indb 1 5/21/13 3:46 PM

Al-ʿArabiyya: Journal of the Association of American Teachers of Arabic

Editor: Reem Bassiouney, Georgetown UniversityAssistant Editor: Emily Severy, Georgetown UniversityBook Review Editor: Mustafa Mughazy, Western Michigan University

Editorial Board Emad Abdul-Latif, Cairo UniversityMahmoud Al-Batal, University of Texas

at AustinMohammed Al-Hawary, University of

MichiganKirk Belnap, Brigham Young University

John Eisele, College of William and MaryCatherine Miller, Centre national de la recherche

scientifiqueMustafa Mughazy, Western Michigan UniversityKarin C. Ryding, Georgetown University

Editorial Office (essays and book reviews)

Reem BassiouneyAl-ʿArabiyya JournalDepartment of Arabic and Islamic Studies, Georgetown University1437 37th St NW, Poulton 206Washington, DC 20007al -arabiyya@ hotmail .com | 202-687-3925

Business Office American Association of Teachers of Arabic3416 Primm LaneBirmingham, AL 35216

Publisher (purchase and copyright)

Georgetown University Press3240 Prospect Street NWWashington, DC 20007http:// press .georgetown .edu

Copyright © 2013 by the American Association of Teachers of Arabic. All rights reserved.Al-ʿArabiyya (ISBN978-1-62616-006-4; ISSN 0889-8731) is published annually by the American Association of Teachers of Arabic.

AATA MembershipA subscription to Al-ʿArabiyya, which is published annually, is included in a membership to the American Association of Teachers of Arabic (AATA). The annual cost of membership is US $50 for individuals, US $15 for students, and US $200 for institutions. AATA welcomes members who live and work throughout the world; AATA does not have a residency or citizenship requirement for members. For more information about AATA membership, to join AATA online, or to download an AATA membership application, please visit the AATA website at http:// aataweb .org/ signup.

Institutions and Library SubscriptionsA single issue of Al-ʿArabiyya, which is published annually, or a one-year subscription may be purchased by institutions and libraries for US $60. Place orders at 800-537-5487 or online at http:// press .georgetown .edu.

Back IssuesTo order back issues, please visit the AATA website at http:// aataweb .org/ purchase _publications. Back issues can be ordered for US $35 each for institutions/agencies and US $20 each for individuals. Most volumes are available in the original edition. If an issue is not available, we can offer a photocopy for US $5 each. Please note that as of Volume 44–45 (2011–2012), back issues are US $60 each and are available from Georgetown University Press.

AdvertisingAATA is pleased to accept a limited number of advertisements, which appear after all editorial content in Al-ʿArabiyya. For information about advertising your institution, organization, publications, or other products or services that relate directly to the needs and interests of AATA members and subscribers, please contact the Executive Director at admin@ aataweb .org.

If your subscription copy of Al-ʿArabiyya has not yet reached you, please contact AATA at American Association of Teachers of Arabic, 3416 Primm Lane, Birmingham, AL 35216 USA. Phone 205-822-6800, fax 205-823-2760, info@ aataweb .org.

ISSN: 978-1-5890-1948-5


Essays

The Development of the Dual Paradigm in Arabic 1Muhammad al-Sharkawi

Arabic Second Language Acquisition Research and Second Language Teaching: What the Teacher, Textbook Writer, and Tester Need to Know 23

Mohammad T. Alhawary

Language Learning Strategies in Arabic as a Foreign Language Textbook 37Raghda El Essawi

From Theory to Practice: Developing a “Visualization Strategy” for Reducing AFL Students’ Reading Anxiety 61

Dalal Abo El Seoud and Mona Kamel Hassan

The Effect of Sounds in Geminate Verbs on Conjugation Patterns: A Study of Labials 81Wafaa Kamel Fayed

Arabic Language Learning Textbooks: An Evaluation of Current Approaches 109Kassem M. Wahba and Aja Q. Chaker

Book Reviews

Key Features and Parameters in Arabic Grammar, Abdelkader Fassi Fehri 123Sahlawayhi 1: Graded Stories for Beginners, Ahmad Khorshid 127

Contributors 135

Contents



Al-ʾArabiyya, 46 (2013), 1–21

Abstract

This article traces the development of the dual in Arabic. It describes the system in Clas-sical and Modern Standard Arabic. It also describes the innovations in the morphologi-cal system and syntactic agreement in the dialects. Pseudo-duals show that, despite the vast morphological and syntactic differences between the dialects in general and Classi-cal Arabic, the dialects come from an earlier system that was similar to that of Classical Arabic if not the same. The article explores the internal linguistic permissive ecologi-cal factors that allowed the dialects to innovate and develop in the dual system. It also explores the arrestive ecological factors that prohibited the dual system in Classical Ara-bic to develop.

Introduction

This article discusses the developmental behavior of the dual paradigm in the Arabic lan-guage in general and the dialects in particular.1 The main assumption of the article is that the dual paradigm in all the varieties of Arabic developed from a similar system. There existed a group of internal linguistic ecological factors that encouraged development in the dual paradigm. The main goal is to demonstrate that the dual paradigm in the dialects and Classical/Modern Standard Arabic responds differently to these internal linguistic

The Development of the Dual Paradigm in Arabic

Muhammad al-Sharkawi, Wayne State University


2 MUHAMMAD AL-SHARKAWI

factors. Classical/Modern Standard Arabic does not respond positively to these factors. It did not reflect any signs of development in the dual paradigm from pre-Islamic times to modern times. The modern Arabic dialects, on the other hand, reflect signs of continu-ous development that can be traced back to pre-Islamic times fifteen centuries ago. The underlying assumption of the article is that the dual paradigm in the modern Arabic dialects developed from an earlier system that was similar to, or even the same as, the system from which dual in Classical Arabic came. The article suggests that pseudo-duals are a developmental residue that justifies this assumption. It is a category of noun that partly behave in a similar way to the dual paradigm in Classical Arabic, which indi-cates that dual in both varieties came from the same source. The fact that pseudo-duals exist in all modern dialects of Arabic and spraschinsel varieties of Central Asia indicates that the phenomenon belongs to the pre-Islamic and/or early Islamic period before the Arab conquests of the Middle East and North Africa. The differential developmental pat-tern of Classical Arabic and the dialects is a result of the latter’s positive response to the favorable ecological developmental factors. The dual is not only important in itself as a morphological paradigm with far-reaching morphological paradigmatic distribution and syntactic implications. Neither is it important because it shows a differential mode of development. Its relevance to us is in the manner in which the system developed in the modern dialects. References to the dual behavior in medieval Arabic sources are scarce and scattered. It is, however, possible to find fairly clear and extensive discussions in the same tradition of the linguistic eco-logical factors that made this development possible. The dual paradigm can, therefore, be taken as a representative of how resilient structures in Arabic develop, and why they do. Understanding how the dual paradigm reacts to ecological factors will presumably enable us to understand the relative force of both internal and external ecological fac-tors2 involved in the development3 of Arabic, standard and dialects alike, structures in general. It will also help us determine how resilient structures innovate. 4

It is not news that the dialects of Arabic seem to innovate in the dual number para-digm and the Modern Standard variety does not. The main argument in this article is in the implications of this commonplace linguistic fact from a comparative historical point of view. In development, some paradigms are more resistant to innovation and change than others. These will be defined here as resilient structures. The dual paradigm, as I argue in this article, is one of those. In this respect it is more resilient in the Classical/Modern Standard variety than it is in the dialects on the one hand. On the other hand, although the dual paradigm exhibits morphological and syntactic development in the dialects that seem to have taken place in pre-Islamic times;, the paradigm is still in a pro-cess of evolution. The dual paradigm in both the dialects and Classical Arabic is, there-fore, more resilient than other structures and paradigms, such as the participles, which evolved in both the dialects and the written variety evenly and in the same direction. However, the developmental importance of the dual paradigm goes beyond this point of relative resilience. It, being a resilient structure, might be taken as an indicator for general development in resilient structures in the Arabic language. As I show in this article, for a resilient structure such as the dual paradigm to develop, several linguistic changes on more than one level of linguistic analysis must take place.


The Development of the Dual Paradigm in Arabic 3

We will see in the following section that phonological, morphological, and syntactic changes were necessary for the development of the dual paradigm. However, a word of caution is important here. The dual paradigm or even the whole number system independently does not in itself give us an adequate picture of the gen-eral developmental pattern of Arabic. It does not single-handedly allow us to generalize about the manner in which Arabic as a complex of levels and varieties develops. But the presence of other paradigms and structures that behave differently toward innovation than the dual does (when these concepts are central to the linguistic analysis) will make it relatively easier for us to draw a more detailed picture of the developmental pattern of Modern Arabic. In this article I hope to make clear that the dual paradigm is a strong, albeit a single, indication that there are some structures in Arabic that can resist favorable, strong, internal, ecological factors toward development and change in one variety and respond positively to them in others. The dual paradigm is not unique in this behav-ior; it behaves evolution-wise in the same way as several other central structures, such as word order, does.5

It is by studying the dual and other similarly resilient global structures as a group that we can validate this assumption and build a solid and data-driven case as to the patterns of development in Arabic. In a previous article (al-Sharkawi 2010b) I asserted that word order, as a basic syntactic structure on merit of its co-occurrences, did not develop in Modern Standard Arabic. The word order structure, function, and auxiliary structures continued without substantial change from what we know as the classical period to the modern times. Traditional medieval Arab grammarians accepted all possible word-order patterns as feasible in Arabic, but SVO and VSO orders were more dominant than other order patterns. In Modern Arabic, all order patterns exist as well, but there is a statisti-cal frequency for SVO order pattern, especially in newspaper Arabic (Parkinson 1981, 24–37). Neither did word order develop widely in the dialects. It is therefore a resilient structure in both varieties. I claim that the dual paradigm in this variety, like word order, serves as yet another indicator that Classical/Modern Standard Arabic does not respond positively to the favorable internal ecological factors that push toward innovation and change. The relevance of the dual paradigm to this general topic is that it is as basic to the morphology of Arabic as word order is basic to its syntax. The accumulations of such indicators not only establish a developmental trend in the history of Arabic, but also help us to understand that there is a general differential response to ecological fac-tors between the dialects on the one hand and Classical/Modern Standard Arabic on the other. However, the dual paradigm and word order are different indicators. From a develop-mental point of view, the dual paradigm, unlike word order, behaves differently in both varieties. In addition, we will see that the degree of development among the dialects also differs. Some dialects have a more approximate dual paradigm to Classical Arabic than others, which in turn exhibit functional and formal innovations that seem to be indicative of potential prospective disuse. While the dual paradigm is resilient in the Modern Stan-dard variety, it is less so in the dialects. Hence, in aggregate, it is not as resilient as word order. In the case of word order, internal ecology is favorable to no innovation, hence no development. But in the dual paradigm, internal ecology is apparently irrelevant to the



Classical variety, since the development of the paradigm in the dialects does not seem to encourage a similar development in the Modern Standard variety. Or, at least, any such internal factors, if they exist, are not effective.

The Argument

In the following section I lay out the internal ecological factors that I assume should facilitate innovation in the dual paradigm in Arabic. After that, I discuss the structural and functional status of the dual paradigm in the Classical/Modern Standard variety of Arabic. I hope to show from this simple discussion that the dual paradigm in Modern Arabic does not respond positively to the said internal ecological factors. The presenta-tion of Classical Arabic dual paradigm gives us baseline data against which we can see the extent of development in the dialectal dual paradigm. I then discuss the form and func-tion of the same paradigm in the dialects. In doing this I do not survey all the dialects, I only use representative geographical dialects to demonstrate the extent and direction of development in the dual paradigm. I then describe the dialectal phenomenon known as the pseudo-duals. I use this phenomenon to make the claim that the original form of the dual in the dialects was similar to or the same as the Classical dual form, because pseudo-dual nouns behave like Classical Arabic dual nouns when receiving a suffix pro-noun. Pseudo-duals are a very good indication that the dialects responded positively to the internal ecological factors and developed from varieties that had a full morphological and syntactic dual concept like Classical Arabic to the current situation. Although one might presume that pseudo-duals could be a late innovation, as we do not find any men-tion of it in the medieval grammatical literature, the fact that it is common in all modern urban dialects and spraschinsel varieties renders any such doubt irrelevant.

Internal EcologyIt has been argued (al-Sharkawi 2010a, 19) that the evolution of the Arabic language after the Arab conquests was a function of the ecology of the evolutionary process. In general, for development to happen, certain internal linguistic factors and external social, sociolinguistic, and demographic factors permit and direct that development. It has been further argued that external and internal ecological factors collaborate to produce, sustain, promote, and/or counter innovations (al-Sharkawi 2010a, 19). While this argument remains pivotal to my understanding of language development in general and of Arabic in particular, a discussion of the possible external factors that pertain to the case at hand is avoided here. Although I believe that external ecological factors, as well as the internal linguistic factors, are both decisive, external linguistic factors such as standardization and the new media effect need further investigation before any serious appreciation of their role in the development of Arabic is attempted. External ecologi-cal factors, in addition, are decisive in the case of Classical Arabic more than they are in the dialects, which are our main point of concern here. Hence, we focus only on internal ecological factors. The general point of this article, therefore, is to suggest that there are



enough internal linguistic ecological factors to prepare for innovation or the spread of innovation; they seem to be irrelevant in the case of the dual paradigm in Classical Ara-bic and productive in the dialects. The internal ecological factors that should facilitate innovation in the dual paradigm of Arabic dialects are mentioned here in no great detail; they have been studied in greater detail previously by other scholars. Internal factors are the makeup of the linguistic ele-ments within the linguistic level of the phenomenon in question or in a different level, but have implications on the formal or functional behavior of a particular structure. The first of these relevant factors is a general typological factor. According to Booij (2005), the grammatical dual number is more marked than the plural and singular numbers. The expression of the dual number on the nouns can, therefore, be modified. If a language has its number system in a typological morphological hierarchy such as singular > plu-ral > dual, the dual is not obligatory (Booij 2005, 126). Innovation in such a case then, will not cause disturbance in the core of the number paradigm, or in other paradigms in the same level and on other levels of the language under development. Innovation will, therefore, probably not be obstructed. In a tolerant typological environment, other factors can be expected to work without resistance. The dialects were, indeed, in a state of innovation in the dual paradigm since the pre-Islamic times. As we see now, they seem to still be in development. Although the dialects have a nominal dual ending in the form of a suffix (Watson 2007, 129), it is an unproductive category in the spoken dialects (Blanc 1970, 42–57).6 This phenomenon is not limited to the modern dialects. There are several references in the books of the medieval Arab grammarians that seem to hint to the possibility that dual in the dialects was not as stable a paradigm as we see it to be in Classical Arabic before the emergence of Islam and immediately thereafter. The dual suffix was reported to have been invariable in Yemen and Hijaz. Although examples are rare and limited in geographical scope, they cannot be ignored. The dual suffix was a frozen suffix –āni in all cases (al-Sharkawi 2010a, 45, 48). Ecologically speaking, it was not only typologically possible for the dual in Arabic to innovate; its users spoke vernaculars that innovated in the dual paradigm as native vernaculars as early as records can take us. But the ancestor of Classical Arabic did not drift toward innovation, hence the rarity of references in the medieval books of grammar. The second internal ecological factor is the disappearance of the masculine-feminine distinction in the dialects in numbers. So, itn-ēn “two” in Egyptian Arabic does not mean two masculine objects or persons; it could also mean two feminine objects or persons. In Classical Arabic iṯn-āni indicates two masculine entities, whereas iṯnat-āni indicates two feminine entities. The dual category is also obsolete in the category of the demon-stratives in the dialects, personal and suffix pronouns, and verb conjugations. The dual category is functional only in the noun category (Brustad 2000, 45). The development is not limited to the morphological paradigm of the dual itself; it also extends to its syn-tactic implications. There is no dual number or gender agreement in the dialects between the dual noun and the following adjectives and verbs (Benmamoun 2000, 22). Look at (1) below from Egyptian Arabic:



(1) kitāb-ēn kuwayys-īnbook-d. good-pl.two good books

There is also no number agreement with verbs, pronouns, and demonstratives as in (2), (3), and (4), also from Egyptian Arabic.

(2) kalb-ēn biy-hawhaw-udog-d. prog-bark-3rd pl.two dogs bark

(3) humma kilmit-ēnthey-pl. word-d.they are two words

(4) dōl walad-ēnthey-pl. boy-d.they are two boys

The agreement pattern of the dual is identical to that of the plural nouns. It is always plural, as the previous examples show (Brustad 2000, 44). The third relevant internal ecological factor is the shaky position of the case system in the modern dialects and in their peninsular ancestors in pre-Islamic times as well, and the mutation of the system in the Modern Standard Arabic and its Classical heritage. 7 Two internal ecological factors are of particular importance as far as the loss of the case system is concerned, and to the development of the dual paradigm in the dialects: the phonological phenomena of the monothongization and ’imāla. My assumption is that the weakening of the case system in pre-Islamic times led to the abolishment of the dif-ference between the two dual endings –āni and –ayni. The ’imāla phenomenon changed the long vowel (ā) into an (ē). I also assume that the change of diphthongs /ay/ and /aw/into (ē) and (ō), respectively, took place in pre-Islamic times. Its spread in Egyp-tian, Sudanese, and Levantine dialects (Watson 2007, 22) suggests a pre-diaspora origin. In this case, the ending –ayni must have gone into –ēn. That is to say, the ’imāla phenom-enon changed the nominative dual form –āni into –ēn, while the monothongization pro-cess must have changed the accusative and dative form –ayni into –ēn.8 The weakening of the case system must have made these changes possible. In a seminal work, Diem (1973, 137) showed that by the first century of the Chris-tian era, the case system was not quite stable in the Arabic personal names, at least as they appear in the Nabataean inscriptions. This finding means that the oldest record of the Arabic language in general, not only the dialects, shows a malfunctional case sys-tem (Owens 2006, 86). This assumption finds supporting evidence in Corriente (1971), where he states that by the beginning of the Islamic era, the functional load of the case system was minimal. He further claims (1971, 47) that the case system at the time was



not integral to the morphological system, and did not have any allomorphs: It was invari-ably suffixed to the nouns with no morpho-phonological interaction. Corriente (1973) makes clear that the low functional load does not mean the immediate abandonment of the system; indeed, many languages may keep redundant systems. The case system was not only functionally irrelevant and formally frozen; Corriente (1975) argues that the system was showing signs of formal decay as well by the early Islamic times. Corriente (1975, 52, 57, 59, 60) discusses instances in classical books and in the Qur’ān itself for an incorrect use of the system. An invariable use of the dual system was, in fact, one of the examples he cited from Kitab al-‘aghani (1975, 52). Two phonological phenomena are interesting. Arab grammarians described the phe-nomenon of bringing short and long a/ā toward the short and long e/ē as ’imāla (Ibn Jinni 1985, 58). Despite the prevalence of the phenomenon in pre-Islamic Arabic, not all Arab tribes in pre-Islamic times shifted short and long low vowel to the high front short and long vowels. Most of the tribes that use ’imāla are eastern and Najdy tribes (Ibn Ya‘īš 1930, 54). Tribes of the western parts did not show this phenomenon with the constancy of the east-ern tribes. Fath, the use of a/ā, was a privilege of the western tribes (al-Gindi 1983, 278). The picture, however, is not so clear. It seems that parts of the eastern tribes did not exhibit ’imāla. By the same token parts of the western tribes exhibited ’imāla (al-Gindi 1983, 280–81). However, a review of the tribes and clans that exhibited the phenomenon shows that it seemed to be prevalent among Arabs. My argument is that ’imāla changed the dual suffix from –ān into—ēn. This change obliterates the difference between the two forms of the dual suffix. The fact that the functional load of the case system was weak mitigated the effect of the sound change on the morphological and syntactic implications of the change. There is an assumption among grammarians and indeed some early Arab scholars that the Qur’ān was revealed without ’imāla, as was the general trend of the western dialects (al-Gindi 1983, 279). The majority of Hijazi readers read the Qur’ān without ’imāla, such as Ibn Kathir (al-Gindi 1983, 287). Since the Hijazi dialects, to which the dia-lect of the prophet belonged, enjoyed a high prestige in early Islamic times (al-Sharkawi 2010a, 33–34) and because it was the form used in the Qur’ān, it was only natural to choose the non-’imāla form as the Classical Arabic form.

The Dual in Classical/Modern Written Arabic

Because of the previous internal ecological factors, one would assume that the dual para-digm in the standard variety should develop, or at least show signs of variation. This is true in the case of the dialects. In Classical/Modern Standard Arabic, however, the para-digm is productive in all nominal semantic categories, human, animate, and inanimate alike. Look at table 1.1 for the different nominal categories that accept the dual suffix: In addition, the dual suffix is also fully functional in the verbal paradigm (Benma-moun 2000, 20–22),9 the pronominal paradigm (except in first person where there is no dual number) and demonstratives. Tables 1.2–1.6 show the different basic moods and aspects of the verbal paradigm.



Table 1.1 Dual Noun Categories:

Category Singular Dual Masculine Dual Feminine

Human raǧul raǧulāni marʾatāniHuman related ḫāl ḫālāni ḫālatāniNon-human fīl fīlāni fīlatāniInanimate kitāb kitābāni madrasatāni

Table 1.2 Classical Arabic Perfective:

Person Number Gender Affix Verb + affix

1 singular F/M -tu daras-tu2 — M -ta daras-ta2 — F -ti daras-ti3 — M -a daras-a3 — F -at daras-at2 Dual F/M -tumā daras-tumā3 — M -ā daras-ā3 — F -tā darasa-tā1 Plural F/M -nā daras—nā2 — M -tum daras-tum2 — F -tunna daras-tunna3 M -ū daras-ū3 — F -na daras-na

Table 1.3 Classical Arabic Imperfective:

Person Number Gender Affix Verb + affix

1 singular F/M ʾ- ʾa-drus2 — M ta- ta-drus2 — F ta-ī ta-drus-i3 — M ya- ya-drus3 — F ta- ta-drus2 Dual F/M ta- ā ta-drus- ā3 — M ya- ā ya-drus- ā3 — F ta-ā ta-drus- ā1 Plural F/M na- na-drus2 — M ta- ū ta-drus- ū2 — F ta-na ta-drus-na3 — M ya-ū ya-drus-ū3 — F ya-na ya-drus-na



In table 1.2 the second and third persons accept the dual in both masculine and femi-nine in the past tense. However, there is no gender or dual number on the first person. Look at the same verb in a different form in table 1.3. In the present tense, the same second and third-person pronouns accept the dual number in masculine and feminine. Again there is no gender or dual on the first person. In the following three tables, we can see that the dual ending on the verb responds differ-ently to the different moods of verbs in Classical Arabic. Differential response to the environment is not limited to the dual paradigm on verbs. The dual suffix responds differently to the case of the noun it is attached to (Ryd-ing 2005, 129). The ending is –ān in the nominative and –ayn in the accusative and geni-tive as in (5), (6), and (7), respectively.

(5) al-raǧul-ān fī-l-baytthe-men-d.n. in the-housethe two men are in the house

Table 1.6 Classical Arabic Jussive:

Singular Dual Plural

1 ʾadrus- nadrus-2M tadrus- tadrus-ā tadrus-ū2F tadrus-ī tadrus-ā tadrus-na3M yadrus- yadrus-ā yadrus-ū3F tadrus- tadrus-ā yadrus-na

Table 1.5 Classical Arabic Subjunctives:


1 ʾadrus-a nadrus-a2M tadrus-a tadrus-ā tadrus-ū2F tadrus-ī tadrus-ā tadrus-na3M yadrus-a yadrus-ā yadrus-ū3F tadrus-a tadrus-ā yadrus-na

Table 1.4 Classical Arabic Indicative:


1 ʾadrus-u nadrus-u2M tadrus-u tadrus- āni tadrus-ūna2F tadrus-īna tadrus- āni tadrus-na3M yadrus-u yadrus- āni yadrus-ūna3F tadrus-u tadrus- āni yadrus-na



(6) raʾaytu al-raǧul-aynsaw-I the-men-d.ac.I saw the two men

(7) raʾytu waǧha al-raǧul-aynsaw-I face the-man-d.gn.I saw the two men’s face

In (5) al-raǧulān is in the subject of the sentence (nominative), in (6) it is the object of a verb (accusative), and in (7) it is the second word in a construct structure (genitive). The dual paradigm in modern written Arabic is not only sensitive to case on the sentence level, it is also sensitive to the ending of the word it is attached to on the morphological level. If the dual suffix comes after a word ending in the feminine marker, it turns into a regular tā’ in writing and pronunciation as in (8):

(8) al-sayyida al-sayyidat-ānthe-ladies-d.s.f. the-ladies-d.f.the lady the two ladies

Similarly, when the preceding noun is bilateral or is a defective noun attaching the dual suffix entails adding a wāw or a yāʾ before the suffix (Brustad 2000, 130–31) as in (9) and (10):

(9) aḫ aḫaw-ānbrother brother-d.

(10) maqhā maqhay-āncafé café-d.

The dual suffix is not only sensitive to the preceding word.; it is also sensitive to the following word or suffix. When the dual ending is attached to the first word of a posses-sive structure, the final –n of the suffix is dropped as in (11) and (12):

(11) humā raǧul-ā l-baytthey-d. men-d. the-housethey are the two men of the house

(12) raʾaytu raǧul-ay al-baytsaw-I men-d. the houseI saw the two men of the house

The same –n deletion takes place when the suffix is followed by a possessive suffix pronoun (Ryding 2005, 131) as in (13):



(13) kitāb-ān kitāb-ā-kabooks-d. books-d.yourtwo books your two books

The change here does not affect the noun but affects the dual suffix itself. However, the dual suffix does not restrict the preceding or the following noun’s capacity to accept different suffixes and/or prefixes. A dual noun can acquire the definite article, can be suf-fixed with a possessive pronoun, and can come in different derivational categories, such as participles and tool and place nouns. Furthermore, the dual paradigm, albeit being mainly a morphological phenom-enon, has strong and far-reaching syntactic implications in Classical Arabic. There is a complete number agreement in the noun phrase (and beyond it into the sentence) between the dual noun and the following adjective, pronoun, or a verb, as in (14) and (15), respectively:

(14) humā bint-ān ǧamīlat-ānthey-d. girls-d.f. beautiful-d.f.they are two beautiful girls

(15) al-bint-ān taʾkul-ānthe-girls-d. eat-d.3rd f.the two girls eat

The agreement in (14) covers the noun phrase where the dual noun is. In (15), agree-ment goes beyond the boundaries of the subject noun phrase.; it expands to the follow-ing verb phrase. There is also a complete and obligatory agreement between the noun and the preceding independent pronoun as in (14), and/or demonstratives as in (16):

(16) hatān madrasat-ān ǧadīdat-ānthese-d.f. schools-d.f. new-d.f.these are two new schools

Functionally, the dual paradigm in Modern Standard Arabic has a single meaning. It strictly refers to two members of any noun category, regardless of the animacy of the noun. It does not acquire any pragmatic or semantic functions along the lines of the modern dia-lects of Arabic that are discussed later. In short, there is a simple correspondence between the single form and a single meaning irrelevant of discourse or semantic variation. In sum-mary, the dual paradigm in Classical Arabic and in the written Arabic of modern times is a stable morphological phenomenon that covers all lexical semantic classes and morpholog-ical categories. It is also a cross-level phenomenon, which is sensitive to preceding and fol-lowing words. It is, therefore, a resilient structure that does not change despite the internal ecological factors that I referred to in the previous section. In the following section I show the effect of the internal ecological factors on the same paradigm in the modern dialects.



The Dual in the Dialects

As in Classical/Modern Standard Arabic, all the varieties of Arabic, with the exception of the Arabic creoles, including Language Islands, have a morphological dual suffix. In addi-tion, they have a pseudo-dual form that is discussed in the following section. All of these varieties seem to behave similarly in the pronunciation of the dual suffix. It is –ēn in the urban dialects, rural dialects, and language islands; and –ayn/–īn in most of the Bedouin dialects, in Moroccan Arabic, and in Yemeni Arabic. The dialects also behave similarly as far as the degree of productivity of the suffix is concerned, that is, the parts of speech and the semantic categories that can accept the dual suffix. Formally speaking, the dual in the dialects is a suffix. It is, however, not a productive inflectional morpheme; it does not come on all word categories. It is attached only to the noun category; but it does not come with verbs, pronouns, demonstratives, and adjec-tives (see Brustad 2000, 45; Ferguson 1959; Blanc 1970). Table 1.7 shows perfective and imperfective verbs in Egyptian Arabic as an example of the modern dialects: Notice that there is no dual category in the second and third persons in both perfec-tive and imperfective. The absence of the dual category from verbs seems to be estab-lished in the history of Arabic dialects, as it is also missing without any residues from the pronominal and demonstrative categories (see. tables 1.8 and 1.9). In table 1.8, there is a total absence of the dual from the feminine and masculine in all numbers. In table 1.9 there are also no dual demonstrative articles. Even in the category of nouns, the dual morpheme is not completely productive. The suffix cannot be attached to all semantic categories. Although it appears equally on the masculine and feminine nouns, it is only attached to nouns that do not refer to human beings or to human professions or occupations. There are very few exceptions to this generalization. The word bint-ēn “two girls” and walad-ēn “two boys” can come in the dual. The dual suffix is usually attached to nonhuman nouns and nouns that refer to non-human animate referents. The dual morpheme is even more restricted in Moroccan and Yemini Arabic than in the other dialects, as it does not appear in the Moroccan dialect group on all categories of inanimate nouns. It is only attached to nouns that refer to phys-ical measures, time, and money, such as ʿām-ayn “two years” and alf-ayn “two thousands”

Table 1.7 Egyptian Arabic Verbs:

Person number perfective imperfective

1 singular katabt aktib1 plural katabna niktib2 singular M. katabt tiktib2 singular F. katabti tiktibi2 plural katabtu tiktibu3 singular M. katab yiktib3 singular F. katabit tiktib3 plural katabu yiktibu



(Brustad 2000, 46–47). The same restrictions on the noun categories that apply to the dual morpheme in Moroccan Arabic also apply to Yemeni Arabic dialects as well, where the dual suffix is attached only to measurements and time (Watson 2009, 106–15). Aside from the pseudo-dual phenomenon, the dual suffix in the dialects does not exhibit any sensitivity to its morphological and syntactic environment on the word, phrase, and sentence levels. The final –n of the suffix is not lost in the first word of the construct structure or before a suffix pronoun. Needless to say, there is no –āni/–ayni dis-tinction in the dual suffix, which comes from the case of the noun to which it is attached. All of the dialects of Arabic are, of course, caseless varieties. Syntactically speaking, the dual suffix does not impose dual agreement on the following adjective and on the rel-evant verb and/or pronoun. Generally speaking, agreement is always masculine plural as in (17), (18), and (19):

(17) ʿarabiyt-ēn gamd-īncars-d.f. strong-pl.m.two strong cars

(18) il-sikkīnt-ēn byiʾa ṭṭa’ū kuwayyisthe-knives-d.f. cut-3rd pl.n. wellthe two knives cut well

(19) humma itn-ēn bassthey-pl. two onlythey are only two

Table 1.8 Pronouns in Egyptian Arabic:

Person Number Gender Pronoun

1 singular M/F ana1 plural M/F ihna2 singular M inta2 singular F inti2 plural M/F intu3 singular M huwwa3 singular F hiyya3 plural M/F humma

Table 1.9 Demonstratives in Egyptian Arabic:

Demonstrative Gender Number

da M singulardi F —

dōl F/M plural



In (17) there is a plural agreement on the following adjective, in (18) there is a verb in the third-person masculine plural after the dual noun, and in (19) the preceding pro-noun is masculine plural. The dual agreement of the Classical variety is taken over by plural agreement in the dialects. It is now clear that the dual in the dialects as a morpho-logical phenomenon lost its sensitivity to the immediate morphological environment and also lost its allomorphs. Formally, in addition, one would assume that the dual in the dialects is no longer a morphological paradigm that has syntactic implications. It causes no change on the phrase and sentence levels. In short, the paradigm is drastically impov-erished in the dialects. In fact, although the dual suffix lost its morphological complexity, it acquired several semantic and pragmatic functions that the Modern Standard variety and its Classical ancestor lack. Semantically, in all the Middle Eastern and North African dialects the dual morpheme acquires more than one meaning. The one-to-one correspondence between form and function is lost. This development is not shared in the same degree among all dialects. In Syrian Arabic, in genera,l a noun suffixed with the dual suffix generally means two of the object designated by the noun (Cowell 1964, 367), although it could also mean a small group of the object in question. It is more akin to the Classical variety in this respect than other dialects. Although the dialects of the Arabian Peninsula also share the two meanings of the dual suffix, the dual suffix leans toward expressing two of the objects in question more than a small group. The dual suffix in the rest of the Middle Eastern dialects, including Levantine, and North African, suffers a more drastic semantic shift. When the dual suffix is attached to an abstract noun, it does not mean exactly two of the objects the noun refers to. In general, a dual noun in the dialects means a small quantity of the noun in question not including two (Brustad 2000, 46; Feghali 1928, 141). If the dual suffix is attached to a concrete noun, it could mean a small number, including two. A word like kitāb-ēn “two books” does not necessarily mean two books, but could mean a few books as well as two books. Using the dual suffix rather than a plural ending on a noun indicates that the number is fewer than a number a regular plural refers to. Following are two examples from two dif-ferent Arabic dialects–– Egyptian and Syrian:

(20) kilmit-ēnwords-duala few words

(21) ʿarabiyt-ēncars-duala few cars

(22) min bayrūt la- ṭrablus, badha ši saʿten swʾafrom Beirut to-Tripoli want ši hours-two drivingfrom Beirut to Tripoli it requires around two hours of driving



In (20) the mere dual suffix signifies a small number that does not mean two. In (21) we do not know if ʿarabiyt-ēn means “two cars” or “a few cars.” The phrase requires additional particles to convey that meaning. While the dual suffix can occur on its own without a particle in Egyptian Arabic as in (20), it could (and often does) occur after the indefinite specific article Ši in Syrian Arabic as in (22) (Brustad 2000, 46). In all the dialects except Moroccan, to express exactly two of the designated noun, they use a structure that is commonly known as the periphrastic dual. The structure of this form is a plural/dual noun + number two, as in

(23) ʿarabiyt-ēn itn-ēncars-d. twotwo cars

(24) nisw-ān tint-ēnwomen-p. two

The noun in (23) is in the dual form with a dual suffix. The number two following the dual noun determines the exact number of the preceding noun. This is the typical structure in Egyptian Arabic. In Syrian Arabic, from where (24) is taken, the structure is different. The plural noun is determined by the number word. Example (23) leaves no room for doubt that the dual suffix in most of the dialects is reserved for a paucal num-ber. This structure allows all of the nominal semantic categories to receive the dual suffix except the human nominal categories.

(25) *ragl-ēn itn-ēnmen-d. twotwo men

This phrase is unacceptable because, unlike in (23), the noun modified by number two is a human noun. The structure of the dual noun followed by number two is also interesting because it shows that the dual suffix is not a stable reference to number two in the minds of speakers in general anymore, especially speakers of Egyptian Arabic. There is another form of the periphrastic duals that is common to eastern, cen-tral, and western dialects alike. It is the number two + plural noun, as in the following examples:

(26) itnēn muhandisīntwo engineers-pl.two engineers

(27) itnēn libnāniyetwo Lebanesetwo Lebanese people



The interesting aspect about this structure is that it does not allow nonhuman nouns to be expressed in the periphrastic dual (Brustad 2002, 48). Nouns after the number two in (26) are a human profession, and it is a human noun in (27). In Moroccan Arabic, this restriction does not exist. The periphrastic dual is the only structure that expresses two of the object in question. Therefore, the phrase ǧūǧ de “couple of ” can accept a human as well as a nonhuman plural noun as in (28):

(28) ǧūǧ de al-ḫilfātcouple of stepstwo steps

Despite the limited scope of data concerning the semantic function of the dual noun + number two periphrastic dual (Egypt), its variation with the number two + plural noun is interesting. Although Brustad (2000) correctly asserts that the use of the periphrastic dual is not recent, it also seems not to be very old or established, at least in the Egyptian and Middle Eastern dialects, where the number two + plural noun can occur with human and nonhuman noun categories, but not with inanimate nouns. It seems that other dialects, especially Moroccan Arabic, exhibit no signs of variation in the periphrastic dual structure and the nominal categories that can occur with it. If the assumption that Egyptian Arabic is lagging in the development is correct, it is an indica-tion that the dual paradigm is still undergoing development in the dialects in general, and is more developed in some dialects than others. The meaning of the dual suffix in Egyptian Arabic is more developed than it is in Syr-ian and peninsular Arabic dialects. In these Middle Eastern dialects, the dual suffix could mean two of the designated noun more than it could mean a small number of that noun. In Egyptian Arabic the dual suffix does not always only refer to two of the designated noun, but acquires its meaning from the semantic category of the noun in question and its animacy. This difference renders the Middle Eastern dialects relatively more conserva-tive than Egyptian Arabic. There is not enough data on the peninsular and Syrian dialects’ dual suffix to afford in-depth analysis of its functional load. However, what we have now allows us to assume that the suffix is in development, even if the paucal plural function is not widespread. Moroccan Arabic is further evidence for both the fact that the dual paradigm is still undergoing development and also an indication for the direction for that development. In Moroccan there are two dual endings –ayn and –īn (Harrell 1962, 105). The –ayn form is used with very limited nominal categories, namely measures, time, money, and numer-als (Brustad 2000, 46). This restriction is not recent since Lerchundi mentions it (Ler-chundi 1900) in the beginning of the twentieth century. These nominal categories do not contain large numbers of nouns. It is interesting that the equivalent of the Classical Arabic diphthong /ay/in Moroccan Arabic is /ī/(Harrell 1962, 104). The –ayn ending is a focalized form inherited from an older period (probably from Classical Arabic). This end-ing is less productive than the dual ending –ēn in other dialects, as it is attached to fewer categories of nouns. The second dual ending –īn is reserved to paired parts of the body as in yadd-īn “hands” and riǧl-īn “feet” (Harrell 1962, 105). This ending is even more limited.



It is my assumption that the comparison between the functional load of the dual ending and the dual noun categories in Moroccan Arabic and the same ending in the rest of the dialects is indicative of the fate of dual in the Arabic dialects in general. The cat-egories that might accept the dual ending in Moroccan are much less in number and volume than in the other dialects. If the other dialects are going to continue innovation in the dual paradigm, the periphrastic dual indicates that they might move toward less-nominal categories accepting the dual morpheme. Classical Arabic and its modern coun-terpart are a stark contrast. They do not share this dynamic of development. The dual morpheme is extremely productive in all lexical categories. The pseudo-duals furnish an indication that the dual paradigm in the dialects, at least as far as the noun categories are concerned, was at one moment in the history of Arabic similar to the dual paradigm in Classical Arabic.

Pseudo-Duals

Pseudo-duals are a small class of nouns of paired body parts that have a plural form in addition to the dual form (Heath 2001, 262–63), except in some varieties in Central Asia. In the dialects, paired parts of the body, being nonhuman nouns, can accept the dual morpheme. Unlike other nouns that accept the dual morpheme in the dialects, though, this category in the dual responds to the possible attachment of suffix pronouns by deleting the final suffix letter nūn of the dual ending (Blanc 1970, 48).

(29) ʿen-ē-keyes-d.-youryour two eyes

(30) ’iǧr-ē-kilegs-d.-your-f.your legs

(29) comes from Egyptian Arabic and (30) comes from Syrian Arabic, but they are easily reproducible in other dialects. We can see from these two examples that the dia-lects once responded to the attachment of inflectional morphemes after the dual ending in the same manner as Classical Arabic. The fact that pseudo-dual nouns are not random words but a semantic category of nouns indicates that probably the dual as a morpheme that reacts to its environment was dropped from whole nominal categories and not from individual nouns or all the noun classes at once. The fact is that all the existing varieties of Arabic share this phenomenon (Blanc 1970, 42) and the same nominal category indi-cates that it is not a recent development. It could have started at an earlier point when all the dialects shared a less diversified vernacular variety. In addition to being a sign for the earlier status of the dual paradigm in the dialects, pseudo-duals also show that like other nominal categories, paired parts of the body, as a semantic category, were going through a development in which they were losing the



dual morpheme altogether. That presumed development must have taken place before the separation between Central Asian varieties of Arabic and the traditional dialects. Pseudo-duals exist in Uzbekistan Arabic only with the suffix pronouns, but do not come unsuffixed in the dual form (Winnikov 1962, 149 and Zimmermann 2009, 616). Unsuf-fixed paired parts of the body come in the plural only. The nonexistence of an indepen-dent dual in Uzbekistan Arabic sets it apart from the rest of the varieties of Arabic. In addition to the dual forms given to the paired parts of the body, members of this nominal category receive plural forms as well.

(31) ʿēn ʿen-ēn ʿuyūnone eye two eyes eyes

(32) yadd yadd-ēn ’yādīone hand two hands hands

These plural forms further support the assumption that what we call pseudo-duals are not a special category of the dual number in Arabic. Rather, they are a residue of a more productive and responsive dual number paradigm, as it was at an earlier time in the history of the Arabic number system. The existence of separate plural forms for paired parts of the body, however, is not common among all traditional dialects. The only non-singular form for paired parts of the body in Moroccan Arabic is the pseudo-dual (Brus-tad 2000, 47). This fact about Moroccan Arabic, together with the nonexistence of unin-flected dual forms in the Uzbekistan Arabic variety, is another indication that the dual was in a process of development for a long time. From the Moroccan example one would speculate that while all dialects respond positively to the internal ecological permissive factors and innovate, some dialects seem to respond faster than others to these factors.

Conclusion

In comparing the pseudo-duals to the modern dialects, we can see the path of develop-ment between an older phase of the dialects and their current status. This article makes the claim that this path of development resulted from the influence of several internal ecological factors that are conducive to change. I have tried to show that the ancestors of modern dialects of Arabic might have come from the same number system that Classical Arabic belongs to. Pseudo -uals show two points of importance in this respect: first, they refer to the fact that the dual suffix once responded to its environment in the same way Classical Arabic still does, suggesting the same origin. Second, the existence of pseudo-duals in a single semantic noun category in all the varieties of Arabic except creoles and the absence of duals in all other morphological categories (except nouns) in all the varie-ties of Arabic suggests that the development of the dual paradigm to its current state in nouns is the latest in the chain of developments.



The absence of duals in verbs, pronouns, demonstratives, and relative pronouns in all the dialects shows that well before the Arab conquests, the development of the dual number was under way. Pending further corroborating evidence though, one could assume, based on the above, that the duals in the dialects well before the Islamic era developed in verbs and other morphological categories other than nouns, and finally started development in nouns. It seems that the development of duals in nouns must have, in turn, started before diaspora in the seventh century, as all the dialects seem to have moved in the same direction: the same categories of nouns accept the duals and the ones that do not are also similar. It seems, in addition, that the development must have affected semantic categories and not individual nouns. The categories of inanimate nouns accept the duals, while most of the animate nouns, nouns referring to humans, and human nouns do not accept the dual suffix. The pseudo-dual phenomenon, in addi-tion, is found in a particular semantic category, that of the paired parts of the body. This article does not look into the possible influence of education, the spread of new functions for Modern Standard Arabic, or the literacy effects of new technologies on the behavior of the dual paradigm in the dialects. These are all external ecological factors whose potential and current influence cannot be measured with any degree of success, except with further in-depth analysis of the anthropological linguistic, sociolinguistic, and linguistic aspects of the modern Arabic scene in general and of its individual elements in particular.

Notes

1. The dual is a grammatical category of number. It refers to two separate real-world entities in the nonlinguistic world (Haspelmath, Steger, and Wiegand 2001, 819). In Arabic the noun kitāb “book” means one book only, whereas the word kitāb-ēn “two books” means only two of the item spoken of. 2. These terms were first used by Mufwene (2001, 2008) to mean the sociolinguistic, linguis-tic, and social factors that influence language variety and direct its development. 3. Development here is any process of innovation, variation, and change that might affect a linguistic structure regardless of its direction. The term, therefore, does not carry any positive or negative value. The development of structure X does not necessarily mean an added degree of structural complexity. 4. The term is mine. It has not been used before in the literature. Resilient structures are (1) the structures that defy development despite favorable internal and/or external ecological fac-tors and (2) have cross-level implications. 5. See Al-Sharkawi (2010b, 41–62). See also Dahlgren (1998, 200–273; 2005, 725–36). See Feghali (1928), and Peled (2009). For a detailed though somewhat outdated description of the importance of word order in linguistic analysis, see Osman (1989, 1–4). 6. See also Ferguson (1959). 7. See Owens (1998). 8. For the loss of final short vowels on nouns in pre-Islamic Arabic, see al-Gindi (1983) for examples and discussion. 9. See Benmamoun (2000).



References

al-Gindi, Ahmad. 1983. Al-lahjāt al-‘arabiyya fit-turāth. Beirut: ad-Dār al-‘arabiyyah lil-Kitāb.al-Sharkawi, Muhammad. 2010a. The Ecology of Arabic: A Study of Arabicization. Leiden: Brill.———. 2010b. “Word Order and the Development of Written Arabic.” Language 5(1): 41–62.Benmamoun, Elabbas. 2000. The Feature Structure of Functional Categories: A Comparative Study

of the Arabic Dialects. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Blanc, Haim. 1970. “Dual and Pseudo-dual in the Arabic Dialects.” Language 46: 42–57.Booij, Geert. 2005. The Grammar of Words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Brustad, Kristen. 2000. The Syntax of Spoken Arabic: A Comparative Study of Moroccan, Egyptian,

Syrian, and Kuwaiti Dialects. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Corriente, Federico..1971. “On the functional yield of some synthetic devices in Arabic and

semitic morphology.” JQR 62: 20–50.———. 1973. “Again on the functional yield of some synthetic devices in Arabic and semitic

morphology.” JQR 64: 154–63.1975. “Marginalia on Arabic diglossia and evidence thereof in the Kitab al-Agani.” Journal of

Semetic Studies 20: 38–63.Cowell, Mark. 1964. A Reference Grammar of Syrian Arabic. Washington, DC: Georgetown

University Press.Dahlgren, Sven-Olaf. 1998. Word Order in Arabic. Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis 12: 200–273.———. 2005. “Word order,” in The Encyclopedia of Arabic Language and Linguistics, volume IV,

edited by Kees Versteegh, 725–36. Leiden: Brill.Diem, Werner. 1973. “Die nabatäischen Inschriften und die Frage der Kasusflixion im Altarabir-

schen.” ZDMG 123: 227–37.Feghali, Michel. 1928. Syntaxe des paries arabes actuels du Liban. Paris: Impr. National.Ferguson, Charles. 1959. “Diglossia.” Word 15: 325–40.Harrell, Richard. 1962. A Short Reference Grammar of Moroccan Arabic. Washington, DC:

Georgetown University Press.Haspelmath, Martin, Hugo Steger, and Herbert Wiegand. 2001. Language Typology and Language

Universals. Walter de Gruyter: Berlin.Heath, Jeffrey. 2001. Jewish and Muslim Dialects of Moroccan Arabic. London: Routledge.Ibn Jinni. 1985. Sirr Sinā’at al-‘I’rāb. Edited by Hasan Hindawi. Damascus: Dar al-Qalam.Ibn Ya‘īš. 1930. šarh al-Mufassal. Cairo: al-Munayiriyya.Lerchundi, Jose. 1900. Rudiments of the Arabic-Vulgar of Morocco. Translated by James M.

Macleod. Tangier, Paris: Spanish Catholic Mission Press.Mufwene, Salikoko. 2001. The Ecology of Language Evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.———. 2008. Language Evolution: Contact, Competition, and Change. London: Continuum Press.Osman, Mirghani. 1989. On the Communicative Role of Word Order in Written Modern Standard

Arabic: A Contribution to Functional Linguistics, PhD diss., University of Salford.Owens, Jonathan. 1998. “Case and proto-Arabic.” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African

Studies 61: 51–73, 217–27.———. 2006. A Linguistic History of Arabic. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Parkinson, Dilworth. 1981. “VSO to SVO in modern standard Arabic: A study in diglossia syntax.”

al-‘Arabiyya 14: 24–37.Peled, Yishai. 2009. Sentence Types and Word Order Patterns in Written Arabic. Leiden: Brill.Ryding, Karin. 2005. A Reference Grammar of Modern Standard Arabic. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.



Watson, Janet. 2007. The Phonology and Morphology of Arabic. Oxford: Oxford University Press.———. 2009. “San’ani Arabic.” In The Encyclopedia of Arabic Language and Linguistics, volume

IV. Edited by Kees Versteegh, 106–15. Leiden: Brill.Zimmermann, Gerrit. 2009. “Uzbekistan Arabic.” In The Encyclopedia of Arabic Language and

Linguistics, volume IV. Edited by Kees Versteegh, 612–23. Leiden: Brill.



Al-ʾArabiyya, 46 (2013), 23–35

Abstract

To anticipate realistic learning outcomes—before the formulation and execution of learning objectives as well as the design of goal-appropriate instructional materials—this article points to the need to consider some of the most essential observations that have emerged from the field of second language acquisition over the past half century. In particular, it points out characteristics of effective input, which is crucial for the devel-opment and delivery of instructional materials. Then it discusses representative empiri-cal findings from Arabic second language acquisition research that follow from the same general observations within the field of second language acquisition. In addition, it offers sample findings of learning challenges that certain forms pose to certain learners of Ara-bic as a foreign language. The article concludes by drawing some various practical impli-cations from such observations and findings for informing teaching, textbook writing/instructional material development, and language testing.

Introduction

With the recent sharp rise in demand for Arabic language learning, the influx of new teachers (with varying degrees of training and experience), and the emerging wishes to

Arabic Second Language Acquisition Research and Second Language Teaching

What the Teacher, Textbook Writer, and Tester Need to Know

Mohammad T. Alhawary, University of Michigan


24 MOHAMMAD T. ALHAWARY

incorporate massive amounts of information related to dialectal varieties and registers of Arabic from early on, it has become crucial to clarify a number of issues so that the profession of Arabic teaching can proceed and prosper realistically. This article is orga-nized into three main sections: The first section deals with four crucial aspects, called here guiding principles, that have become almost axiomatic in second language acquisi-tion (SLA). These are among the most essential aspects that characterize effective for-eign language materials, which are useful for the classroom teacher, the textbook writer, and the proficiency tester, and which have become noncontroversial among language acquisition theorists and practitioners. The second section discusses representative find-ings from Arabic SLA research in line with such guiding principles as well as findings of learning challenges that certain forms pose to certain learners of Arabic as a foreign lan-guage. The third section draws various practical implications from the first two sections of the article that are useful for the teacher, textbook writer, and tester as well as for what constitutes effective and realistic input for Arabic instructional materials.

Guiding Principles

Clarity of InputIt is well-known that language learners make their own hypotheses of the target lan-guage and use according to the input they receive. Therefore, it has become widely accepted in SLA that the clearer the input the learner receives, the easier it is for the learner to approximate to target language forms by restructuring the knowledge repre-sentation that he or she had formed about the target language to one that more conforms to the target language. Conversely, the less transparent the input is, the more likely the forms of the target language are fossilized; that is, , reaching a state or a level that fails to approximate to the target language any further. In other words, if we assume that second language learning consists of declarative knowledge (i.e., the knowledge base that comprises the different forms and functions of the target language) and its transfer to procedural knowledge (i.e., its use and produc-tion in real time), then providing the learner with a transparent (rather than obscure) input containing a clear representation of structures and rules of the language is a crucial prerequisite for effective foreign language teaching. This is particularly so in light of the limited amount of input and time available for learning in the classroom.1

Frequency of InputRegardless of the amount of planning and efficacy of a particular classroom activity to present a certain form or item, it cannot be assumed or guaranteed that the particu-lar form or item in focus in the input ends up being noticed and learned (i.e., becomes “uptake” or “intake”) by the learner.2 Even if a form ends up being noticed and learned, it cannot be guaranteed that the form will be retained in the interlanguage system of the learner from one single exposure in classroom or textbook input. Hence, recycling forms or items frequently in the input is perhaps the single most essential measure to ensure retention and reinforcement.


Arabic Second Language Acquisition Research and Second Language Teaching 25

The role of input frequency is widely acknowledged in the SLA literature. Larsen-Freeman and Long (1991, 91) state that among the main factors of morpheme order acquisition, “only input frequency has much empirical support to date.” Similarly, and based on a meta analysis of a number of morpheme order studies, Goldschneider and DeKeyser (2001) found input frequency to be a significant acquisition factor (together with four other factors: perceptual salience, morphological regularity, semantic com-plexity, and syntactic category). Additionally, Nation (2001) cited many studies which found “repetition” or recycling of vocabulary and grammatical constructions crucial to learning.

Integration of Form and FunctionThe communicative approach is often misunderstood to imply that knowledge of the grammar is not as important as other language skills. Relegating a marginal role for grammar instruction has often taken place as a result of prior teaching methods’ exclu-sive focus on the teaching of grammar, the demand for fluency in English as a second language, especially by those who have already spent many years (at the middle school level, high school level, and even college level)3; or as a result of simply misunderstand-ing the nature of the communicative approach. However, proponents of the communi-cative approach and most foreign language theorists and practitioners adopt the view that grammar is one of the important composite skills for developing communicative competence and not a marginal one. Canale and Swain state:

Communicative competence is composed minimally of grammatical compe-tence, sociolinguistic competence, and communication strategies, or what we refer to as strategic competence. There is no strong theoretical or empirical moti-vation for the view that grammatical competence is any more or less crucial to successful communication than is sociolinguistic competence or strategic com-petence. The primary goal of a communicative approach must be to facilitate the integration of these types of knowledge for the learner, an outcome that is not likely to result from overemphasis on one form of competence over the others throughout a second language program. (Canale and Swain 1980, 27; see also Leech and Svartvik 2002, 3)

The importance of grammar instruction (whether explicitly or both explicitly and implicitly) is especially evident in teaching highly inflected languages (i.e., with exten-sive morphological paradigms) such as Arabic. It is inconceivable for the experienced teacher of Arabic to imagine teaching Arabic without attending to grammatical features such as roots and patterns, which are amenable to effective language learning strategies of figuring out the part of speech to which a word belongs, guessing its meaning, and even recalling its proper pronunciation. In addition, focusing on meaning to the exclu-sion of form may, based on Arabic research findings, likely lead the learner to focus on improving his or her fluency to the exclusion of formal accuracy (see Alhawary 2009, 196–97). SLA research shows that explicit instruction is more effective than implicit (alone) instruction in adult second language learning and, in fact, a main characteristic of



the fundamental difference hypothesis (Bley-Vroman 1989) between L1 and L2 is that “adult learners have lost most of their ability to acquire languages implicitly” (Abraha-msson and Hyltenstam 2008). Research studies have shown that it is not possible to learn even vocabulary implicitly (e.g., Laufer 2003, 2005; Mondria 2007; Schmitt 2008).

Integration of Language SkillsPrior to the rise of the current communicative language teaching approach, language skills—speaking, listening, reading, and writing—used to be taught in isolation from each other and from content and context. As we have come to know more about lan-guage learning factors, including those mentioned above as well as others such as learner’s motivation, one can see the limited effectiveness of teaching language skills in isolation from each other and from content and context. Integrating language skills has several advantages, including (1) allowing the reinforcement of the language skills themselves, since by nature the four language skills, when integrated together, can rein-force one another; (2) allowing for the reinforcement of content, meaning, and form, since integration of skills will lead to a good deal of recycling of input; (3) allowing for awareness and practice by the learner of the full range of use, patterns, and intricacies of language; and (4) allowing for boosting and sustaining the learner’s motivation, since integration of skills will likely make the learner more involved and more aware of what he or she can do with language. Such benefits and others are so significant that the need to integrate the language skills has become a must in second language teaching.4 A recent study by Brown et al. (2008) showed in particular that vocabulary acquisition through listening alone is less effective than when integrating it with reading.

Some Representative Findings from Arabic SLA

Empirical findings from SLA research have become available over the past few decades. Such findings are of immense importance for foreign language teaching and proficiency testing in general. Research findings specific to Arabic as a second language by speak-ers of other languages such as English, Danish, French, Spanish, and Japanese have also become available (e.g., Alhawary 2009, 1999; Abu Radwan 2002; Mansouri 2000; Nielsen 1997; Bolotin 1996; Al-Buainain 1986; Fakhri 1984) with findings specifically useful for the Arabic language teaching profession.5

Acquisition of Gender AgreementSome of the most significant findings from Arabic SLA relate to the acquisition of nomi-nal gender agreement. Gender agreement was investigated mostly with respect to the role of the native language in learning Arabic as a foreign language and was found to present a learning difficulty especially when the feature is absent in the native language. Research findings show that nominal gender agreement seems to be more challenging to English speakers than to French speakers, for example, and that difficulty seems to persist well into the third year of learning Arabic (Alhawary 2009; Nielsen 1997).



Acquisition of NegationAcquisition of present, past, and future negation constructions are found to interact with the presentation and sufficient recycling of input. In other words, the sequence of the presentation of the type of negation and the amount of recycling may affect the emer-gence sequence of the negation type accordingly, but negation constructions are found to be readily acquired by the learners upon exposure to and recycling in the input. The developmental sequence of negation yielded (upon the presentation of the present- tense negation, then past-tense negation, then future-tense negation) according to the findings are:

(1) present-tense negation with the negation particle laa ➞ (2) past-tense negation with maa ➞ (3) future-tense nega-

tion with lan ➞ (4) past-tense negation with lam.

Although past-tense negation with lam was introduced before future-tense negation, past-tense negation with lam was acquired later than future-tense negation. These find-ings show that past-tense negation with lam may present a difficulty to learners, since it is introduced as an optional rule of the past-tense negation with maa and since it requires use of the present form of the verb preceding it rather than the past form (Alhawary 2009; see also Al-Buainain 1986).

Acquisition of Mood on the Verb following the Negation Particles laa, lam, and lanUnlike the acquisition of present, past, and future negation constructions, research find-ings for the indicative mood occurring on the verb following the present-tense negation particle laa, the jussive mood occurring on the verb following the past-tense negation particle lam, and the subjunctive mood occurring on the verb following the future-tense negation particle lan showed either nonemergence or brief emergence, including in par-ticipants who received additional input outside the classroom (see Alhawary 2009).6 In other words, mood emerged in only a few of the learners, and even in those cases, emergence was sporadic and learning gain was not sustained. What is significant about this finding is that it correlates with the type of (textbook) input that the participants received. Each negation construction was introduced and its mood marking was pre-sented; however, the textbook input did not recycle the feature mood. Thus, the findings indicate that the lack of steady emergence of mood seemed mainly due to lack of input recycling.

Acquisition of Case on the Subject and Predicate of kaana and laysaResearch findings on the acquisition of nominative and accusative case occurring with the subject and predicate of kaana and laysa, respectively, during the first year of Ara-bic language instruction yielded no emergence in any of the participants (Alhawary 2009). Case of the subject and predicate of kaana and laysa was introduced via addi-tional instruction outside the classroom, since it was not presented in the input until toward the end of the one-year period of the observation. It was speculated that the



lack of emergence may be due to one of two reasons: either to lack of being enforced in classroom teaching (since it was presented experimentally outside the classroom), or to developmental factors in that the learners may not have been ready to process the form, which itself entails the ability to process other prerequisite features such as gender and number agreement between the subject and predicate of the copular verb kaana or the negation particle laysa.7

Practical Implications

Implications for the Teacher and Textbook WriterThe forgoing guiding principles and empirical research findings briefly mentioned above have significant implications for both the teacher and the textbook writer. Effective for-eign language materials and teaching in the classroom would necessitate taking into account factors to do with the quality and quantity of content or input as well as design and implementation of the various activities and drills used. In particular, forms are gen-erally better learned if they are presented with sufficient amount of recycling in the input (i.e., presenting a given form in subsequent lessons and drills several times), form and function are presented together, and skills are further integrated with each other to allow for additional reinforcement and recycling as well as making the content interest-ing and motivating for the learner. In addition, since direct feedback is reported in the SLA literature to have little or no effect on the learner as a method for error correction in general, the language teacher is better advised to abstain from resorting to this method, especially when dealing with challenging features such as gender agreement that may present a challenge for certain learners (such as English speakers). Instead, the teacher can use different (indirect) and reflective methods and can be tolerant of such errors, since they are reported to persist well into intermediate level and beyond.

Implications for the Proficiency TesterArabic second language research findings can have equally significant implications for proficiency testing both for training novice testers as well as for refinement of the rubrics within the different proficiency levels. Among the limitations of the current ACTFL scale is that the rubrics of the different levels contain vague descriptors in refer-ring to grammatical elements, such as the following:

Novice High:• Firstlanguagemayinfluence . . .syntax

Intermediate Low:• Syntax . . .stronglyinfluencedbyfirstlanguage

Intermediate Mid:• Difficultymanipulatingtimeandaspect• Inaccuraciesingrammarand/orsyntax . . .butunderstoodbysympathetic

interlocutors



Intermediate High:• Withsomeconsistencycannarrateanddescribeinmajortimeframes(past,pres-

ent, and future)• Failuretomaintainthenarrationordescriptionsyntactically

Advanced Low:• Abilitytonarrateanddescribeinallmajortimeframes• Controlofaspectmaybelacking• Sufficientaccuracy . . .canbeunderstoodbynativespeakersunaccustomedto

dealing with nonnatives

Advanced Mid:• Goodcontrolofaspect• Muchaccuracy

Advanced High:• Animperfectgraspofsomeforms

Superior:• Virtuallynopatternoferrorintheuseofbasicstructures• Sporadicerrors,particularlyinlow-frequency . . .andinsomecomplexhigh-

frequency structures(ACTFL 1999; see also ACTFL 1989)

There are at least two problems with these descriptors. First, they do not specify any grammatical structures to help the interviewer determine the level of the interviewee, placing emphasis primarily on functions. Apart from the two terms referring to tense (or “major time frames”) and aspect, no other specific grammatical features are stated. Second, the descriptors seem to treat the notion of complexity (as in the superior level) as being static and level-specific, irrespective of L2 acquisition factors (see also Spinner 2007). The tester is left to decide (based on what seems intuitive from the tester’s point of view) what “basic” and what “complex” mean.8

On the other hand, identifying complex or problematic structures based on research findings can help the interviewer avoid misidentifying the correct level of the inter-viewee. Thus, beyond Novice High and Intermediate Low-Mid levels, rubrics of other levels do not acknowledge the difficulty faced by English speakers when learning gender agreement due to influence of the native language. Accordingly, current ACTFL rubrics may need to be refined to acknowledge that certain learners, such as English speakers, may make more errors than usually expected at such levels. Testers can then be cautioned to take into consideration other rubrics of the level before rushing to judgment in deter-mining the level of the interviewee.

Implications for What to Include in the First 1–2 YearsDue to the time constraints on Arabic language learning in classroom settings and assuming learners have zero background in Arabic, perhaps the single most appropriate



word that characterizes effective input during the first 1–2 years of learning Arabic is real-istic input, being both transparent and free from multiple codes and registers. When all language and literacy skills (i.e., not just speaking) are intended, the term realistic refers to focus on teaching Modern Standard Arabic (MSA) during the first 1–2 years for at least three, main, realistic considerations. First, the learner is faced with many immediate learning tasks including the learning of the orthographic and the sound systems. For example, at the early stages of acquisition, Arabic learners tend to have difficulty with producing the guttural sounds and in turn simple expressions, such as sʕabaaħu l-xayr “good morning,” which contain such sounds. Incorporating information about different realizations/variants of sounds and other information related to dialects and registers from the beginning, while useful, would increase the learning burden for the learner who would be faced with too much input to comprehend and proceduralize. At the early stage of learning an L2, even learning vocabulary is less efficient than at a later stage, since the learner has not acquired sufficient basic working knowledge (e.g., morphologi-cal knowledge) of the L2 (Nation 2001; Redouane 2001; Webb 2007). 9

Second, and on a par with other languages such as English, French, Spanish, Italian, etc., educated (not uneducated or illiterate) native speaker language is the baseline for second language attainment, which includes both the development of language profi-ciency and literacy.10 While dialectal varieties are part of the natural dimension of Arabic (and indeed of many languages, English, French, Spanish, Italian, etc.),11 such varieties are better learned later as layers (or additional competences) resting upon and extend-ing from the standard variety. This has already been recognized by the Arabic teaching profession as evidenced by the requirement to demonstrate proficiency in a given dialect (in addition to MSA) to attain the superior level on the ACTFL scale. Third, for speaking, formal spoken Arabic in pause form, rather than Standard Arabic in full form, can be used. The choice is not unrealistic, since it resembles the formal or semiformal spoken Arabic that Arabs, especially from different or far-apart regions, use when communicating with each other, and since productive skills in MSA are required, as MSA has its communicative complementary distribution with dialects (i.e., used in religious, formal, media, academic contexts, etc.) in almost all countries in the Arab world. In addition, and even in contexts where MSA does not fall in complementary distribution with a given dialect, one can argue for the notion of authentic language use not at the level of product but rather at the level of process, where in instructed second language learning receptive skills are reinforced by productive skills and visa versa (see Alosh 2000, 6–7). 12

Of course, there are other reasons for delaying the teaching of dialects beyond the first 1–2 years. Perhaps the most significant reason (second only to the time constraints or the nature of the quality and quantity of input available in the college classroom in a foreign language context) for teaching MSA first and delaying the teaching of dialects is learner’s choice. Teaching dialect first must invoke the same old problematic questions: which dialect and why? Some of the most serious considerations include the facts that students (during the first 1–2 years of language study) may not have any informed opin-ion of their own, may not have developed a region of interest, or may not have even settled on a major of study yet; that the deferred choice to learn a dialect later allows the



ability to transfer credits to other academic institutions (especially those that may not teach the desired dialect) with less likely problems; that often the nature of the dialect to be taught is not clear (e.g., “Levantine” versus no fewer than five distinct dialects in Syria alone); and that the different colloquial varieties are rule-governed with similar and different rules (e.g., phonological, morphological, grammatical, pragmatic, etc.) from each other and from MSA, making it harder and very challenging for both the teacher and textbook writer to maintain development of language skills in parallel and from the onset.13

Moreover, unless the teaching of a given dialect is done methodically, allowing for the full range of regional variations (which may be quite extensive) to be explored, the learning of a given dialect would remain quite limited. Consider, for example, the syn-onyms of the verb for “he takes” byaaxud, byiħmel, bishiil, and bi’iim, and those for the verb “he falls” byuwaʿ, byi’aʿ, byus’utʕ, and byindabb, which different speakers in Damascus may selectively use. As mentioned above, even learning vocabulary items involve many knowledge aspects and is a process which is less efficient at an early stage than at a later stage, since the learner has not yet developed a working knowledge of the L2 language systems. Moreover, introducing synonyms from early on compounds the learning bur-den further. Research findings indicate that it takes less time and effort to learn unrelated words than related words when presented together in the same context (Nation 2000) and that the learning of synonyms of previously known words is less difficult at a later stage of lexical development, once “a cumulative gain of vocabulary knowledge” has been attained (Webb 2007). Whatever the case may be and whenever dialectal features are taught, depending on the learning objectives and students’ needs, more items to be included in the input should translate into more time allowed for the forms and func-tions to be practiced in different contexts and more recycling in the input and all this to be done not at the expense of other items and forms already present in the input. Finally, teaching more than one dialect at the same time and from early on may likely lead to pidginization or learning a hybrid variety of Arabic not spoken by any native Arabic speaker. With no sufficient exposure to input or time to proceduralize the declara-tive knowledge of MSA and its varieties, learners would not likely be able to distinguish between the different phonological, morphological, syntactic, and pragmatic systems of the different dialects and that of MSA. Their knowledge representation in their interlan-guage systems would simply be a function of this type of exposure. This would accord-ingly impact their use of the target language both receptively and productively.

Conclusion and Future Directions

With the limited amount of time available for teaching Arabic at the college level, it is crucial that we be realistic about the expectations as to what can be taught and what can be learned. Inclusion in the input of more items related to dialects and inundating the learner with disparate information, multiple codes, and rules from early on makes the learning of Arabic as a foreign language more challenging than necessary and distracts from addressing the pressing problems in the field. Notwithstanding the age-old issue



of how the teaching of dialects is tackled, the more pressing problems in the Arabic language teaching profession are threefold: those related to the learners, those related to the teachers, and those related to the teaching materials. First, students are having difficulty learning Arabic, some are discouraged, and some are often led to despair and eventually give up on learning Arabic altogether. As a result, only a few students attain high proficiency in Arabic. Second, with the rapid demand to learn Arabic, the Arabic language teaching field has not been able to catch up and is in dire need of qualified teachers who have:

• formaltraininginArabic(i.e.,withtherequiredknowledgebase),• formaltrainingincurrentforeignlanguageteachingmethodology,• awarenessofresearchfindingsfromSLA• Arabiclanguagecompetence,• talent• primaryinterestinArabicandteaching.

Third, with the few textbooks available compared with other foreign languages, the Ara-bic language teaching field is woefully lacking in teaching materials (both in print and online), teachers’ resources, learners’ dictionaries, and pedagogical grammars. It goes without saying, in order to be optimally effective, guidelines and principles (stemming from realistic learning outcomes such as those identified in SLA research) are needed to create as well as to execute Arabic instructional materials.

Notes

1. This situation contrasts with that in first language acquisition, where the child is exposed to rich, varied, and sustained input. Accordingly, the practical view of SLA classroom input adopted here is essentially compatible with Universal Grammar (UG) as well as non–UG-based theoreti-cal accounts of input (e.g., Krashen 1985; Bley-Vroman 1989; Schwartz and Sprouse 1996; Ellis and Laporte 1997; White 2003; Zyzik 2009). 2. Slimani (1992) demonstrated that the learner’s attention may not be fully predicted. Slimani used recall charts to elicit students’ responses about forms focused on during classroom instruction and reported that 89 percent of the items in focus were noticed and learned. The remaining 11percent of the items were picked up from classroom discourse without any predeter-mined instructional plan. However, it turned out that even the 89 percent portion that was noticed was not indicative of prior instructional planning for many reasons, mainly because many uptaken items (defined as “noticed and learned” items) that occurred were not the target of instruction but were subject to the interactional dynamic of the classroom discourse, many targeted items were simply not uptaken, and many items were idiosyncratically uptaken with each learner attending to a subset of the forms in focus (Slimani 1992; Schmidt 1994). 3. See also Canale and Swain (1980) who state: “It is perhaps because most applications of communicative approaches have been directed at advanced levels of second language learning . . . that there is a tendency to accord grammatical factors a secondary role in the organization of com-municative syllabuses” (, 23).



4. For other advantages and arguments in favor of integrating the language skills, see Oxford (2001). See also Atwell (1983) and Hubert (2008) advocating the same position. 5. For a comprehensive review of these studies and others, see Alhawary (2009). 6. The study consisted of both observational and experimental components. 7. For details of the instrumentation of the studies from which the findings are reported here (including information about the participants, data collection procedures, operationalization of emergence, teaching schedules of textbook input, raw data, etc.), see Alhawary (2009). 8. This raises even more concern, as there is no consensus in the SLA literature as to what constitutes complexity. 9. This does not apply to heritage learners (with knowledge beyond kitchen Arabic), the non-heritage learners with prior exposure to Arabic, certain learners with high aptitude for foreign lan-guage learning, or those who receive many additional weekly hours of instruction outside of the classroom. Some programs seem tempted to claim credit for early gains in dialect knowledge and MSA (especially in fluency) without acknowledging the presence of such learners, leaving out unaccounted for the majority of the typical learners of Arabic who enter Arabic programs with zero knowledge and who are made to face additional learning burdens from early on. 10. Uneducated native speakers include those who have not received their education in Arabic (in educational settings where Arabic is the medium of instruction) and do not primarily read and write in Arabic. Although many uneducated (including illiterate) native speakers of Arabic may not have productive skills in MSA, almost all such speakers have tacit knowledge of MSA, since they are exposed from birth to MSA multiple venues where MSA is spoken or heard. 11. One needs only take a cursory look at the second language teaching textbooks of such lan-guages where the standard variety of any of these languages characterize the input. Some of these languages may have an equal number if not greater number of dialectal varieties such as Spanish dialects in Latin America and elsewhere. One even may consider American English (leaving aside other nations’ regional dialects of English) as having a great deal of variations at the phonological, morphological, syntactic, and lexical levels as demonstrated, for example, by the Dictionary of Amer-ican Regional English published in four volumes (1985–2002) with the fifth volume forthcoming. 12. It might be argued that providing a mixed dialect and MSA exposure may be more appro-priate for two-year programs than larger programs. However, from a language maintenance per-spectives, such exposure would lead to language attrition if similar exposure is not maintained later. By contrast, establishing a robust foundation in MSA and literacy skills will aide the learner more readily to maintain continued exposure to MSA and attain further proficiency development later due to the ubiquitous nature and venues of MSA, especially in a foreign language context. In addition, this would not prevent the learner from developing competence in a dialect or dialects when desired and when the appropriate spoken-dialect venues are available. 13. One apparent risk is that learners may fossilize into mixing both dialect and MSA in formal contexts or in writing without being able to tease the two apart. The University of Michigan has previously experimented with introducing dialects from early on with negative results (Raji Ram-muny, personal communication). Unfortunately, no published data are available for the purpose of this article.

References

Abrahamsson, Nicholas and Kenneth Hyltenstam. 2008. “The robustness of aptitude effects in near-native second language acquisition.” Studies in Second Language Acquisition 30: 481-509.



Abu Radwan, Adel. 2002. “Sentence processing strategies: An application of the Competition Model to Arabic.” In Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics XIII–XIV, edited by Dilworth Parkin-son and Elabbas Benmamoun, 185–209. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

ACTFL (American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages). 1989. ACTFL Arabic Profi-ciency Guidelines. Foreign Language Annals 22: 373–92.

———. 1999. ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines: Speaking. www .actfl .org/ i4a/ pages/ index .cfm? pageid=3325.

Al-Buainain, Haifa. 1986. Second Language Acquisition of Arabic: The Development of Negation and Interrogation among Learners in the UK. PhD dissertation, University of Edinburgh. Qatar: Dār Al-Thaqafa.

Alhawary, Mohammad T. 1999. Testing Processability and Effectiveness of Computer-Assisted Language Instruction: A Longitudinal Study of Arabic as a Foreign/Second Language. PhD dis-sertation, Georgetown University.

———. 2009. Arabic Second Language Acquisition of Morphosyntax. New Haven, CT: Yale Uni-versity Press.

Alosh, M. Mahdi. 2000. Instructor’s Handbook of Ahlan Wa Sahlan: Functional Modern Standard Arabic for Beginners. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Atwell, Margaret A. 1983. “Reading, writing, speaking, listening: Language in response to context.” In Teaching Reading with the Other Language Arts, edited by Ulrich Hradt, 21-30. Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association.

Bley-Vroman, Robert. 1989. “What is the logical problem of foreign language learning?” In Linguistic Perspectives on Second Language Acquisition, edited by Susan Gass and Jacquelyn Schachter, 41–68. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Bolotin, Naomi. 1996. “Resetting parameters in acquiring Arabic.” In Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics IX, edited by Mushira Eid and Dilworth Parkinson, 166–78. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Brown, Ronan, Waring, Rob, and Sangrawee Donkaewbua. 2008. “Incidental vocabulary acquisi-tion from reading, reading-while-listening, and listening to stories.” Reading in a Foreign Language 20 (2): 136-63.

Canale, Michael, and Merrill Swain. 1980. “Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing.” Applied Linguistics 1: 27.

Ellis, Nick C., and Nadine Laporte. 1997. “Contexts of acquisition: Effects of formal instruc-tion and naturalistic exposure on second language acquisition.” In Tutorials in Bilingualism: Psycholinguistic Perspectives, edited by Annette M. B. de Groot and Judith F. Kroll, 53–83. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Fakhri, Ahmed. 1984. “The use of communicative strategies in narrative discourse: A case study of Moroccan Arabic as a second language.” Language Learning 34 (3): 15–37.

Goldschneider, Jennifer M., and Robert M. DeKeyser. 2001. “Explaining the ‘Natural Order of L2 Morpheme Acquisition’ in English: A meta-analysis of multiple determinants.” Language Learning 51: 1–50.

Hubert, Mike. 2008. The Relationship Between Writing and Speaking in the U.S. University Spanish Language Classroom. PhD dissertation, Purdue University.

Krashen, Stephen. 1985. The Input Hypothesis: Issues and Implications. London: Longman.Larsen-Freeman, Diane E., and Michael H. Long. 1991. An Introduction to Second Language Acqui-

sition Research. New York: Longman.Laufer, Batia. 2003. “Vocabulary acquisition in a second language: Do learners really acquire

most vocabulary by reading? Some empirical evidence.” The Canadian Modern Language Review 59 (4): 567-587.



———. 2005. “Instructed second language vocabulary learning: The fault in the ‘default hypoth-esis’.” In Investigations in Instructed Second Language Acquisition, edited by Alex Housen, and Michel Pierrard Vol. 25: 311-329. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Leech, Geoffrey, and Jan Svartvik. 2002. A Communicative Grammar of the English Language. New York: Longman.

Mansouri, Fethi. 2000. Grammatical Markedness and Information Processing in the Acquisition of Arabic L2. Munich, Germany: Lincom Europa.

Mondria, Jan-Arjen. 2007. “Myths about vocabulary acquisition.” Babylonia 2: 63-68.Nation, I.S. P. 2000. “Learning vocabulary in lexical sets: Dangers and guidelines.” TESOL 9 (2):

6-10.———.2001. Learning Vocabulary in Another Language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University

Press.Nielsen, Helle Lykke. 1997. “On acquisition order of agreement procedures in Arabic learner

language.” Al-ʿArabiyya 30: 49–93.Oxford, Rebecca. 2001. “Integrated skills in the ESL/EFL classroom.” ESL Magazine 6: 18–20.Redouane, Rabia. 2001. The Use of Modern Standard Arabic Word Formation Processes by English-

Speaking and French-Speaking Adult L2 Learners and Native Speakers. PhD dissertation, University of Toronto.

Schmitt, Norbert. 2008. “Instructed second language vocabulary learning.” Language Teaching Research 12 (3): 329-363.

Schmidt, Richard W. 1994. “Implicit learning and the cognitive unconscious of artificial gram-mar and SLA.” In Implicit and Explicit Learning of Languages, edited by Nick Ellis, 165–209. London: Academic Press.

Rammuny, Raji. Personal communication: “The University of Michigan has previously experi-mented with introducing dialects from early on with negative results.” April 10, 2011.

Schwartz, Bonnie D., and Rex A. Sprouse. 1996. “L2 cognitive states and the full Transfer/full access model.” Second Language Research 12: 40–72.

Slimani, Assia. 1992. “Evaluation of classroom instruction.” In Evaluating Second Language Education, edited by J. Charles Alderson and Alan Beretta, 197–220. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Spinner, Patti A. 2007. Placement Testing and Morphosyntactic Development in Second Language Learners of English. PhD dissertation, University of Pittsburgh.

Webb, Stuart. 2007. “The effects of synonymy on second-language vocabulary learning.” Reading in a Foreign Language 19 (2): 120-36.

White, Lydia. 2003. Second Language Acquisition and Universal Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Zyzik, Eve. 2009. “The role of input revisited: Nativist versus usage-based models.” L2 Journal 1: 42–61.



Al-ʾArabiyya, 46 (2013), 37–59

Abstract

Textbooks are one of the most important tools that teachers use in class (Kleinsasser, Robert, quoted in Mayumi Parry. 2000. “How ‘communicative’ are introductory undergraduate-level Japanese language textbooks?” Japanese Studies 20 (1): 89–101). It is therefore necessary to ensure their effectiveness. This paper investigates teacher per-ceptions of how Arabic as a foreign language (AFL) textbooks deal with an important tool used to enhance language learning, namely language learning strategies (LLS). I attempt to look into teacher perceptions of LLS they believe the books they use encourage most and least. By manipulating an adaptation of Oxford’s SILL inventory, I try to detect what AFL teachers believe to be the LLS and strategy categories that the textbooks they use encourage students to utilize and the extent to which they do so. Results reveal that AFL teachers who participated in this study regard cognitive as the strategy category that AFL textbooks encourage students to use most, whereas the category that textbooks highlight least is affective. Results also reveal that the total number of strategies that are regarded as heavily encouraged by textbooks is ten, whereas the total number of strate-gies that fall within low range is thirty-four. Despite a number of limitations, including depending solely on teacher perceptions, the paper draws attention to the need to moni-tor how AFL textbooks deal with LLS considered by many researchers in the field as an important tool for enhancing language learning.

Language Learning Strategies in Arabic as a Foreign Language Textbook

Raghda El Essawi, American University in Cairo


38 RAGHDA EL ESSAWI

Introduction

With the increase of interest in learner-centered approaches and learner autonomy, there was an increasing interest in helping learners “take charge of their own learning” and “chart their own pathways to success” as Brown (2007, 130) puts it. Arguments in educational psychology emphasize that learning institutions should “empower people with the tools and means to become independent and successful life-long learners” (Winstein, Husman, and Deirkin 2000 in Manchon 2008). All of the above indicates that a shift has taken place in the field of education from concentrating interest on the “product,” or what FL learners are to learn, to concentrat-ing on the “process”, or how the process of learning will take place (Oxford 1990). In the field of language education, the above changes led to an increase in interest in tools that students could use to learn faster and better. This in turn has led to an interest in the learn-ing strategies that successful learners use, in an attempt to make them available to all.

Definition of LLS

Despite the controversy over the definition of a learning strategy (Griffiths 2007; Rahimi, Riazi, and Seif 2008; Gass and Selinker, 2001), for the purposes of this study, Oxford’s (2003) definition will be adopted. She defines LLS as, “Specific actions, behaviours, steps, or techniques that students (often intentionally) use to improve their progress in developing L2 skills.” She further states, “These strategies can facilitate the internalization, storage, retrieval, or use of the new language. Strategies are tools for the self-directed involvement necessary for developing communicative ability” (33). The fact that this definition clearly stresses that strategies are actions or types of behavior that facilitate learning makes it suitable for the purposes of this study, where certain types of behavior are considered as reflective of certain LLS and strategy categories.

Taxonomy of LLS

As Cohen (2001) points out, LLS are classified in different manners. They could be clas-sified by function (language learning strategies vs. language use strategies), by skill (lis-tening, speaking, reading, writing, and vocabulary learning), by proficiency level, by age, by culture, or by purpose (metacognitive, cognitive, affective, social, and affective). This study uses the last type of classification (i.e., strategies classified by purpose). According to Brown (2007) O’Mally et al. (2009) have divided strategy categories into metacognitive strategies (used for planning for learning, thinking about learning etc.); cognitive strategies (used for dealing with learning material); and socioaffective strategies (used for interaction with others while learning). Questions have arisen, how-ever, about the adequacy of such categorization. Oxford (1990) then presented a more comprehensive categorization that includes strategy categories suggested by Chamot and O’Malley but also adds new ones. Oxford (2003) explains that her categorization


Language Learning Strategies in Arabic as a Foreign Language Textbook 39

was an attempt to “place strategies into a more coherent and comprehensive typology and to redress the woeful lack of research emphasis given to social and affective strategies” (128). Thus, she divides strategies into two groups: direct and indirect strategies (Brown 2007). Direct strategy categories include strategies used to deal with language informa-tion: (1) memory strategies like grouping, imagery, rhyming; (2) cognitive strategies that include strategies used to deal with new information like analyzing, summarizing, and practicing; (3) compensation strategies that include strategies used by learners to help them fill the gaps in their linguistic knowledge, like guessing and using synonyms. On the other hand, group indirect strategies include strategy categories that help learn-ers organize their learning: (1) metacognitive strategies that encompass strategies like planning for language tasks, self-evaluating progress; (2) affective, which includes strat-egies like dealing with anxiety and self encouragement; and (3) social, which include strategies like interacting with colleagues in class or with native speakers (Oxford 1990, 2003). This classification suggested by Oxford (1990) represents the framework for her Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL), which is the instrument that is used in this study. A long list of studies have supported the positive effect LLS have on the process of second language acquisition (for a complete review, check Leavell and Hong-Nam 2006; Oxford and Ehrman 1995; Chamot 2009). In fact, research conducted by Flaitz et al. (1995), and Nakatani (2005) has revealed that LLS are teachable and that an increase in awareness of LLS leads to a better language performance, although sometimes inconclu-sive research about LLS indicates that they are useful tools in the foreign language class. Despite the limited research done on LLS in AFL classes, there is evidence that more needs to be done to enhance learners’ use of appropriate LLS during the process of learning. For example, a study conducted by Khaldieh (2000) on learning strategies used by AFL writers points out the need to provide learners with “adequate training in strategy use, especially pertaining to the affective domain” (531). There is also research showing the need to incorporate LLS in AFL teaching material. In a study conducted by Kadah (2005) on reading strategies introduced to AFL learners, the researcher suggests the need to teach material that emphasizes the use of LLS to help AFL teachers introduce strategies needed to enhance the targeted skill. These and similar studies indicate the need to further understand how LLS as a tool for enhancing language learning are used in AFL classes. In light of the above, and in light of the limited or lack of research describing how or whether LLS are deployed in AFL textbooks, this study attempts to detect teacher perceptions of the extent to which AFL textbooks encourage use of LLS. Research shows that textbooks could have an immense influence on shaping the pro-cess of language instruction, since most students and teachers, especially new ones, take their cue from textbooks they are using (Kleinsasser 2000). Thus, ignoring LLS could actually mean depriving learners the benefit to be gained from these tools or leaving it to chance. The above explains why encouraging learners to use LLS in textbooks is consid-ered to be an important criterion in the evaluation of their effectiveness. For example, in Rubdy’s (2003) framework for choosing textbooks to be used in class, he suggests the need to look into whether they “help individual learners discover their learning style and


40 RAGHDA EL ESSAWI

preferences, study habits, and learning strategies,” “provide explicit instruction on vari-ous language learning strategies and suggest ways of using and developing them,” provide a “sufficient range of strategies,” “encourage learners to evaluate their strategies” (48). Failure to do any of the above is expected to violate what Rubdy refers to as the material’s “psychological validity,” which in turn affects its general validity for use in class. Evaluation of the effectiveness of textbooks or certain aspects of textbooks has often depended upon teacher perceptions. As Al Amri points out, there is a need to involve the “insiders” (teachers) as opposed to “outsiders” (administrators, parents, politicians) in the process of textbook evaluation since they have the advantage of being part of the teaching context and they are aware of and fully involved with the students. As such, they can provide useful “insights” about the teaching material being reviewed. Goals of research that depend upon teacher perceptions for textbook evaluation include:

• Detectionoftextbooks’strongpointsandweakpointstoevaluatetheireffective-ness (Riasati & Zare 2010; Rahimpour 2011; Kirkgoz 2009; Aytug 2007).

• Studyingtheeffectofteacherperceptionsonsuccessfulimplementationoftext-book or teaching material objectives (Cope 2002).

• Inspectingspecificfeatureswithintextbooksorlookingintohowtextbooksdealwith certain issues (like stereotyping, for example) to provide writers and pub-lishers with recommendations regarding such issues (ECELEC in Hong Kong report).

Like the above-mentioned research, the current study depends on eliciting teacher per-ceptions about the extent to which textbooks they use encourage (or not) use of LLS. It has to be mentioned here, however, that the main goal of this paper is not to evalu-ate any specific textbook used in AFL classes, but it aims at detecting the extent to which teachers perceive the material they use as encouraging learners to employ learning strat-egies during the process of learning (or the contrary). Results of the study are expected to highlight teacher perceptions about the type of LLS they believe textbooks they are using stress and those that they believe textbooks they are using do not stress. In other words, it presents teacher views about an issue that could, according to Rubdy (2003), negatively affect textbook effectiveness. Thus, it is hoped that the paper will open the door to a discussion of the role textbooks play (or should play) in developing LLS.

The StudyResearch questions.The following are the research questions that are tackled in this study:

• Whatarethestrategycategories(aspresentedbyOxford’sSILL)thatteachersperceive textbooks to encourage? To what extent are they encouraged (heavily, moderately, or minimally)?

• WhataretheindividualLLSstrategiesthatteachersperceivetextbookstoencour-age? To what extent are they encouraged (heavily, moderately, or minimally)?

• Whatarethepossibleexplanationsforresultsreached?



Context.This study was conducted in the Arabic Language Institute (ALI) at the American Uni-versity in Cairo, which is mainly an intensive program for teaching Arabic as a foreign language, but it also provides the option of studying single Arabic courses to one-year-abroad students. Period of study in the program ranges from one semester (approxi-mately fourteen weeks of study) to two years. Most students come to the program after they have studied Arabic in other institutions for periods that range from one to three years. There are others, however, who start their learning in the program from scratch.

Subjects.Subjects participating in this study were 29 teachers in the ALI. All participants in the study are graduates of the TAFL program in the ALI at the American University in Cairo, which could act as a standardizing factor when it comes to teacher background. All sub-jects work within a teaching institution (the ALI) that encourages pedagogical practices that promote use of compensation strategies (like guessing meaning from root or con-text), remembering effectively (like grouping, revision), and using mental strategies (like skimming and scanning, using reference resources, or avoiding literal translation). Though practiced to varying degrees, sharing the aforementioned pedagogical practices could also act as another standardizing factor, making subjects a relatively homoge-neous group. Such factors are expected to reduce the differences between researcher and respondents regarding question interpretation, which is one of the main problems that could negatively affect the success of questionnaires (like the one that was used in this study) as a research instrument for gathering information. This is also expected to reduce the effect of differences between participants in the study regarding years of experience, which ranged from one year to twenty years. It has to be mentioned, however, that cases where teachers display a wide difference in experience are not many (only three subjects had one year experience and three had over ten years, while the rest fell between five and ten years). Most participants have taught a wide variety of courses, which means that they have used a wide variety of textbooks. However, in responding to SILL, teach-ers were encouraged to report on one textbook only, which they were asked to identify. Some teachers responded to more than one questionnaire, each representing a separate textbook. The total number of textbooks surveyed was six books.

Data collection procedures.Data were collected over approximately one month before the end of the fall semester. Teachers received the questionnaire either by hand or via email.

Instrument

The main instrument used in this study is SILL, which is one of the most widely used questionnaires for measuring frequency of using LLS by language learners (Oxford et al. 2004). This study, however, used it to detect the frequency with which LLS included in SILL are encouraged by AFL textbooks from the perspective of AFL teachers. In order


42 RAGHDA EL ESSAWI

to allow it to do so, some changes in language used were introduced to the wording of (not strategies included in) the inventory to make statements express types of behavior that textbooks encourage learners to perform. Thus, statements like “when learning a new word I . . .” were replaced by “when teaching a new word the textbook I use encour-ages my students to . . .” (for a copy of the instrument used, see appendix A). SILL depends upon Likert scale-type responses (ranging from “never or almost never true of the book I use” to “always true of the book I use”). Thus, it provides a means to detect the extent to which teachers perceive a certain LLS, or set of strategies. The rate of encouraging strategies could either fall within high range (3.5–5.0), medium range (2.5–3.4), or low range (1.0–2.4). The high range indicates the teacher believes that the textbook she or he is using strongly emphasizes strategies in question, the medium range suggests that teachers believe strategies are being moderately encouraged, and low range indicates they are minimally encouraged. Reasons for depending on SILL in this study as well as numerous research studies about LLS (as well as this one) are varied. One reason is that SILL includes Oxford’s strategy categories described as “the most comprehensive classification to date” (Ellis 1994, 34). Furthermore, SILL has revealed high reliability coefficients in the studies that used it (from .85 to .98) (Oxford and Burry-Stock 1995; Sheory 1999; Wharton 2000).

Data AnalysisDescriptive statistics was used to detect the extent to which teachers perceive textbooks they are using encourage use of learning strategies based on means obtained. Also, t-tests were used to detect statistical differences between the various strategy categories.

Results and Discussion

Results are geared toward highlighting teacher perceptions regarding the extent to which the textbooks they use encourage learners to use LLS. Although teachers based their responses to the questionnaire on specific textbooks they were using in class (to ensure seriousness of reporting), results of the teachers’ questionnaire have been aggregated to form a more general picture of the role textbooks are viewed as playing in encourag-ing strategy usage. Moreover, breaking down the results that were reached according to specific books would create results that are statistically insignificant. Thus, there is no mention of how specific textbooks fared regarding encouraging strategy usage.

Results1. Teacher perceptions about extent to which strategy categories encourage learners as represented in Oxford’s SILL.A review of strategy category use reveals that the most heavily encouraged strategy cat-egory in ALI textbooks according to AFL teachers is the cognitive. Strategy categories in general are rank-ordered in table 3.1 from most- to least-encouraged categories: It is interesting to note that all strategy categories are at medium range (3.09–2.66) except for affective strategies, whose means indicate being at low range (2.33). Despite the above-mentioned fact, analysis has revealed that there is a statistically significant



difference between the cognitive strategy category and most other categories, namely memory, affective, metacognitive, and social (at alpha = 0.05 and df = 56). This indi-cates that according to ALI teachers, cognitive strategies are clearly favored by textbook developers, which supports Oxford’s statement that learners are mostly regarded as “cognitive-metacognitive information processing machines” (Oxford 2003,128). It is interesting to note that this concentration on the part of textbooks on cognitive strate-gies is not shared by AFL learners in ALI. Research done by Yacout (2010) using SILL reveals that advanced and elementary-level students in ALI report heavier reliance on social and compensation strategies when compared with cognitive strategies. On the other hand, in research done by Serry (2010) using a modified version of SILL where ALI teachers respond to questions about strategies they emphasize while teaching, results indicate that only teachers of elementary levels stress cognitive strate-gies. The results of the mentioned studies and the current one raise questions about the interplay between the features each study highlighted (teachers, textbooks, or students themselves) in forming the final picture of strategy use in AFL classes. As for studies done outside the ALI using SILL, it was noted that cognitive strategies were moderately used by AFL learners (Saleh 2000. Affective strategy category is perceived to be encouraged least by AFL textbooks. In fact, data analysis reveals that there is a statistically significant difference between this strategy category and cognitive, compensation, and metacognitive categories (to the advantage of the latter group).Similarly, studies conducted by Yacout (2010) and Serry (2010) reveal that this strategy category is also used least by AFL teachers and learners at elementary and advanced levels. The lack of concern for affective strategies in AFL classes was also noted in a study done by Khaldieh (2000). It is also worth noting that a study conducted by Khalil (2003) pointed to medium range of usage by males and females of strategies in affective category, however, when rank ordered, it was noted that affective category was the one that both males and females relied on least. This seems to indicate that despite the negative effect that anxiety could have on AFL learners and research recommending actively training learners to address this problem (Khalideh 2000), more could be done in AFL classes to help learners deal with this problem. It is also worth noting that compensation strategies are perceived as slightly more encouraged by textbooks when compared with memory strategies. This could be an indication of a tendency toward strategies that aim at successfully filling in the gaps in learners’ knowledge as opposed to those that enhance committing the facts of the

Table 3.1 Strategy categories textbooks encourage.

Strategy category Mean Standard Deviation

Cognitive 3.09 0.77Compensation 2.81 0.97Memory 2.71 0.71Social 2.67 1.04Metacognitive 2.66 0.99Affective 2.33 1.06


44 RAGHDA EL ESSAWI

language to memory. It has to be mentioned here, however, that difference between both categories was not found to be statistically significant.

2. Teacher perceptions about individual strategies that textbooks encourage learners to use most and least.(a) Most.As it appears in table 3.2, a total of ten individual strategies are reported by teachers to be heavily encouraged in textbooks. These mainly fall under cognitive (five strategies) and memory (three strategies), followed by affective and compensation (one for each).Despite the fact that the compensation strategy category is reportedly encouraged to a slightly higher extent than memory in the previous section, only one of its individual strategies falls within high range. On the other hand, table 3.2reveals that three mem-ory strategies are perceived as being among the most encouraged strategies. This does not, however, conflict with results of the previous section because a bigger number of memory strategies fall within low (or even the lowest) range compared with compen-sation. This has rendered compensation as a category to come before memory when descending, arranged according to extent to which each is encouraged. Generally speak-ing, it seems that strategies that reportedly fall within high range are those that attempt enhancing learning (2, 13, 15, 39, 31), accuracy (30, 20), and communication (41, 23), plus knowledge of culture (79). This combination of strategies creates an acceptable environment for communicative learning (Brown 2007; Hadely 2001). This does not mean, however, that textbooks could be considered communicative. In fact, discussion shows that important strategies necessary for successful communication are perceived by teachers as missing.

Table 3.2 Individual strategies textbooks most frequently encourage.

Item No. Strategy statement Mean Category

30 To seek specific details in what learn-ers hear or read.

4.17 Cognitive

2 Put the new word in a sentence so learners can remember it.

4.07 Memory

13 Review often. 3.76 Memory31 Use glossaries and dictionaries. 3.72 Cognitive20 Practice the sounds and alphabet of

the new language.3.68 Cognitive

39 Look for patterns in the new language. 3.66 Cognitive79 To try to learn about the culture of the

place where the language is spoken.3.63 Affective

15 Go back to refresh learners’ memory of things learned much earlier.

3.62 Memory

41 To guess meaning of words learners do not know from context.

3.55 Compensation

23 Initiate conversations in the L2. 3.50 Cognitive



(b) Least. IThe total number of strategies that fell within low range (generally not encouraged or almost never encouraged) is 34 strategies. If strategy categories are rank-ordered start-ing by ones with the highest percentage of individual strategies falling within low range, this order would be as indicated in table 3.3. These results support the fact that cognitive strategies are perceived by teachers to be the strategies that authors of textbooks they are using have relied on most heavily. They also highlight the fact that a considerable chunk of useful LLS are perceived as generally or almost never encouraged by ALI textbooks. A review of this group of individual strategies will be done starting by categories whose items were regarded by teachers as being least encouraged.

a. Affective strategiesStrategies within this category that fall within low range, included in descending order, are noted in table 3.4 Table 3.4 makes clear that none of the individual strategies included in this category fell within high range (which supports results reached in analysis accord-ing to category), and only one showed moderate frequency, namely, “Actively encourage themselves to take wise risks in language learning such as guessing meaning or trying to speak, even though they might make mistakes.” The difference in the extent to which textbooks are regarded as encouraging this strategy item compared with other affective strategies could be a result of its wording, linking it to compensation (by mentioning “guessing meaning”) and cognitive (because of its referring to “initiate conversation in the new language”). This might have concealed the affective connotation included in the strategy statement, namely to have learners actively encourage themselves to take risks. It was interesting to note that three statements made by five different teachers on the questionnaire revealed that teachers themselves feel that teaching material should not be responsible for encouraging affective strategies. One teacher commented on two of these items: “How can a book encourage this?” The others just wrote “not applicable” next to five of the strategy items that are listed in this category. However, there are a num-ber of books that have successfully attempted to encourage learners to practice using

Table 3.3 Percentage of individual strategies that fall within low range in each category.

CategoryNumber of

strategy items within low range

Total number of strategy items in

that category

Percentage of low range items vs. No. Of items

Affective 6 strategy items 8 strategy items 85.7%Social 5 strategy items 9 strategy items 55.5%Memory 8 strategy items 12 strategy items 53.3%Metacognitive & Compensation

8 strategy items4 strategy items

16 strategy items8 strategy items

50%50%

Cognitive 3 strategy items 25 strategy items 12.5%

Total 34 strategy items 80 strategy items 42.5%


46 RAGHDA EL ESSAWI

certain affective strategies. These include “Fourth Dimension” presented in McDonough and Shaw and (1993), “New Vistas,” and “Lecture Ready” presented in Brown (2007). These include using readings in students’ study books to identify key advice about learn-ing, using strategy grids that include statements about self-encouragement, or discuss-ing frustrations as part of language activities. Other examples of activities that could be included in textbooks to enhance affective strategies include games that develop linguis-tic ability and self-encouragement (Al-Sawi 2010). For example, a self-encouragement game could include a drawing of a box with a number of gifts to be awarded to oneself or shared with others. These gifts could be a “best speaker award,” a “getting better” or “not afraid of errors” medal, etc. At the end of difficult activities, the textbook could suggest that the teacher go back to this box and have each student pick an award for him or herself and say why. The weather forecast could be used to encourage students to speak about their fears and frustrations when learning a new language while enhancing their linguistic abilities. Vocabulary of forecasts—rainy, stormy, sunny weather—could be made available. Then students would answer questions using them, like, “When people laugh at my Arabic it feels like the weather is -----.” Teachers could ask students to write diary entries about the “weather forecast in the Arabic class today,” whereby they express frustration or satisfaction with their performance in the AFL classes on that day. Students are expected to read the forecast that expresses their feelings to their col-leagues. Sharing such diaries in class are expected to reduce student anxiety and frustra-tion (activities inspired by Moskowitz 1979). Simple activities like these would enable textbooks to address affective aspects more effectively.

b. Social and compensation strategiesIn this section social and compensation strategies are dealt with since low-frequency strategies in both are related to the same aspect of language learning, namely, verbal communication. Six of the nine strategies included in the social category fell within low range (table 3.5). In the case of compensation strategy items, four out of eight fell within low range (table 3.6).

Table 3.4 Individual strategies within low range in affective strategy category.

Item No. Strategy statement Mean

71 Talk to someone they trust about their attitudes & feelings concerning L2 learning process.

2.30

65 Try to relax whenever they feel anxious about using the new language.

2.26

66 Make encouraging statements to themselves. 2.1569 Pay attention to physical stress. 1.8970 Keep a private diary or journal where they write their feel-

ings about language learning.1.89

68 Give themselves tangible reward when they have done something well

1.78



It is easy to note that all the strategy items in the above two tables have to do with helping learners maintain successful communication. Possible explanations for not including such strategies in AFL textbooks (despite calls for developing learners’ communicative abilities) are varied. One explanation is that most of the teachers have answered the inventory based on books specifically teaching Modern Standard Arabic (MSA). Thus, strategies that involve learning about MSA through contact with native speakers (strategy items 72, 76, 73, 74, and 45) could be considered to be of limited or no benefit to learners since native speakers use a different variety with seemingly different linguistic features, namely colloquial. Thus, the fictitious dichotomy rendering MSA and colloquial as two separate varieties and encouraging their teaching as such could be one of the reasons leading to ignoring some or all of the above-mentioned strategies in books teaching MSA. This will remain, however, a mere assumption until more data is gathered that specifically addresses students’ perception of LLS they use for learning MSA vs. those they use when learning colloquial. It is also interesting to note that even colloquial books do not seem to encourage the above-mentioned strategies. A quick review of col-loquial textbooks done by the researcher revealed that books reviewed (three books) do not provide learners with expressions that could be used to ask native speakers to slow down, verify that other people understand them, ask people to correct their pronuncia-tion, or to ask people to help them when they are in trouble. Furthermore, none of the expressions used by native speakers to encourage an interlocutor to provide an unknown

Table 3.5 Individual strategies within low range in social strategy category.

Item No. Strategy Statement Mean

72 To ask the speaker to slow down, repate, or clarify what was said.

2.38

76 To have a regular language learner partner. 2.3673 To ask other people to verify that I have understood or said

something correctly.2.20

74 To ask other people to correct their pronunciation. 2.1977 When they speak with a native speaker to let him/her know

when they need help.2.11

Table 3.6 Individual strategies within low range in compensation strategy category.


44 use gestures or switch back to their own language when they are speaking and cannot think of the right expression.

2.33

48 Direct the conversation to a topic of which they know the words.

2.33

45 ask other person to tell them the right word if they cannot think of it in a conversation.

2.30

47 Make up new words if they don’t know the right ones. 2.30


48 RAGHDA EL ESSAWI

word is introduced. Again, a more structured survey of colloquial books needs to be con-ducted before the above-mentioned assumptions could be presented as fixed statements about books teaching colloquial.

c. Memory strategies.Despite the fact that three of the fifteen memory strategies were rated as having a high frequency in textbooks, eight strategies were among those regarded as minimally encour-aged in textbooks (table 3.7). As mentioned earlier, teacher perceptions reveal that there is a reduced dependence on memory strategies in textbooks since their means show that most of them fall within “never or almost never true of the book I use” (less than 2.4). Despite the importance of the mentioned strategies in learning, storing, and accessing things like vocabulary or verb forms, teachers who participated in the study did not seem to think that textbooks had a role to play in developing them. The following question was written by one respon-dent next to the statement about whether the book encourages students to use flash-cards: “Does the book need to explicitly say use flashcards?!!” The feeling here is that it is not required from any book to suggest specific means for helping learners remember what they have learned. While many teachers tend to agree with Nation (1994) that it is necessary to teach learners strategies to remember learned vocabulary, they find it strange that textbooks would take a role in doing that by presenting or encouraging strat-egies like the ones mentioned above. The memory strategies also include the two strategies, of the eighty strategies included in SILL, that were perceived to be encouraged least. The first is using flashcards, and the second is using rhyming to remember words. Such perceptions could possibly indicate that at least one extremely useful learning strategy in the case of Arabic is not encouraged in targeted AFL textbooks since Arabic, whose morphosyntactic system allows for simi-larities in word structure, makes finding words that rhyme with new ones easy.

Table 3.7 Individual strategies within low range in memory strategies.


12 Physically act out the word 2.388 Use a combination of sounds and images to remember the

new word. 2.25

9 List all the other words I know that are related to the new word and draw lines to show relationships.

2.22

10 Remember where the new word is located on the page, or where they first saw or heard it.

2.19

4 Associate the sound of a new word with the sound of a familiar word .

2.17

7 Visualize the spelling of the new word in my mind. 2.0811 Use flashcards with the new word on one side and the

definition or other information on the other.1.88

5 Use rhyming to remember it. 1.69



(d) Metacognitive strategies.Another group of strategies perceived as being minimally encouraged by textbooks belong to the metacognitive category. Out of the sixteen strategy items included in this category, eight have means indicating that they fall within low range. These strategies are included in table 3.8. Although it would seem that the above strategies are good learning habits that only the learner is responsible to develop, books can play an important role in helping learners through this process. For example, books can help learners direct and assess their learning. This process is of crucial importance in enhancing learning and asserting learner autonomy. This could be done by adding grids in which learners are encouraged to plan, note their errors, and evaluate their achievement (strategy items 57, 56, 62, 63). As Oxford (1990) mentions, “Goals and objectives are expressions of students’ aims for language learning. Students without aims are like boats without rudders; they do not know where they are going, so they might never get there!” (157). More importantly, research done on ESL (Griffiths 2007) and AFL teachers’ and learners’ perceptions of LLS (Salem 2010) has revealed that both groups in both lan-guages regard such strategies as important. Thus, the importance of strategies such as the ones mentioned earlier are not questionable; however, means of integrating them or whether they are integratable in textbooks seems to be questionable, at least to some ALI teachers. As one teacher put it, “the book doesn’t address these issues.” Another stated, “Do books address these issues?! I wish. . . . ” As noted earlier, a series of books teaching

Table 3.8 Individual strategies within low range in metacognitive strategy category.


57 To plan what they are going to accomplish in language learning each day or each week.

2.41

52 To try to find out all they can about how to be a better lan-guage learner by reading books or articles or by talking with others about how to learn.

2.30

56 To plan their goals for language learning, for instance how proficient they want to become or how might they want to use the language in the long term.

2.30

63 To learn from their mistakes in using the new language. 2.2862 To try to notice their language errors and find out the

reasons for them.2.22

50 To try to concentrate on what any person speaking in the language is saying and put unrelated topics out of their mind .

2.15

55 To organize their language notebook to record important language information.

2.12

54 To arrange any physical environment to promote learning; for instance, they find a quite comfortable place to review.

1.80


50 RAGHDA EL ESSAWI

English that follow principles of strategy instruction do encourage learners to reflect on their learning by providing them with tables and grids to complete on weekly bases.

Limitations of the StudyAlthough teacher perceptions in the process of textbook evaluation are important, there are still drawbacks to studies that limit themselves to this type of data. Using other types of data, for example, data to determine student perceptions could have rendered results reached by this study more reliable. Al Amri points out that triangulation or use of data from different sources, then comparison of this data, is an important means of assessing validity of data. Another limitation of the study is the use of close-ended questions only in the questionnaire used for gathering data. This is believed to lead to a limited amount of information since it only allows comments on statements set by questionnaire, which may lead to missing useful information that open-ended questions could have elicited.

Conclusion

Results of this study can be safely regarded as raising concerns about deployment of LLS in six Arabic textbooks. Results in the previous sections of this paper indicate that AFL textbooks are perceived as being moderately encouraging in most strategy categories except affective. Results also indicate that textbooks are perceived by teachers as con-centrating mainly on cognitive strategies or strategies that help learners deal with new information through analyzing, summarizing, skimming, scanning, and so on. At the other extreme are affective strategies; the results of the study indicate that all of them fall at the bottom of the low range (i.e., under “never or almost never true of the book I use”). Even with the tendency to moderately encourage all other strategy categories, a large number of strategies that are necessary for using learned material in communication, like compensation and social strategies, are perceived as “generally not encouraged” by a big sample of AFL textbooks. Also, a considerable chunk of metacognitive strategies neces-sary for having learners monitor and promote their learning are regarded as missing. It would therefore seem that results of this study point to a need to look closer at how LLS are dealt with in AFL textbooks. All of the above seems to indicate the need for more research geared toward moni-toring how and whether AFL textbooks deal with LLS. As Brown (2007) points out, more and more textbooks for teaching second and foreign languages (especially English) have embedded LLS instruction within their language activities. Similarly, AFL mate-rial developers could opt to include LLS as part of activities for practicing language or as part of student manuals in the form of “self-help” guides that students could use to enhance LLS suitable for the various tasks required by the textbook. As Howe, Grierson, and Richmond (1997) as well as Spor & Schneider (1999) state, textbooks are an extremely important tool that shapes the process of learning. It is therefore necessary to ensure that such a tool properly orchestrates all of the variables that take part in enhancing skills learners need for language acquisition.



Appendix A:Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) Version for Teaches of Arabic as a Foreign language

Based on R. Oxford’s SILL (1999)

The Strategy Inventory For Language Learning (SILL) is designed to gather information about how the book/teaching material you are using to teach Arabic as a foreign lan-guage, go about teaching that language. Please read each sentence and mark the response (1,2,3,4,or 5) that tells how true the statement is, in terms of what you actually do when you are teaching the new language.

1. Never or almost never true of book I use. 2. Generally not true of book I use. 3. Somewhat true of book I use 4. Generally true of book I use 5. Always or almost always true of book I use.

1. Part AWhen teaching a new word the book/teaching material I am using encourages my stu-dents to:

1 - create associations between new material and what they already know. 2 - put the new word in a sentence so they can remember it. 3 – place the new word in a group with other words that are similar in some way

(for example, words related to clothing or feminine nouns). 4 – associate the sound of the new word with the sound of a familiar word. 5 – use rhyming to remember it. 6 – remember the word by marking a clear mental image of it or by drawing a

picture. 7 – visualize the spelling of the new images to remember the new word. 8 – use a combination of sounds and images to remember the new word. 9 – list all the other words I know that are related to the new word and draw

lines to show relationships. 10 - remember where the new word is located on the page, or where they first saw

or heard it. 11 – use flashcards with the new word on one side and the definition or other

information on the other. 12 – physically act out the new word.

When presenting new material the book/teaching material I am using encourages my students to:


52 RAGHDA EL ESSAWI

13 - review often. 14 – schedule their reviewing so that the review sessions are initially close

together in time and gradually become more widely spread apart. 15 – go back to refresh their memory of things they have learned much earlier.

1. Never or almost never true of the book I use. 2. Generally not true of the book I use. 3. Somewhat true of the book I use. 4. Generally true of the book I use. 5. Always or almost always true of the book I use.

Part BThe book/teaching material I am using encourages my students to:

16 – say or write new expressions repeatedly to practice them. 17 – imitate the way native speakers talk. 18 – read a story or dialogue several times until they can understand it. 19 – revise what they write in the new language to improve their writing. 20 – practice the sounds or alphabet of the new language. 21 – use idioms or other routines in the new language. 22 – use familiar words in different combinations to make new sentences. 23 – initiate conversations in the new language. 24 – watch TV shows or movies or listen to the radio in the new language. 25 – try to think in the new language. 26 – attend and participate in out-of-class events where the new language is

spoken. 27 – read for pleasure in the new language. 28 – write personal notes, messages, letters, or reports in the new language. 29 – skim the reading passage first to get the main idea, then go back and read it

more carefully. 30 – seek specific details in what they hear or read. 31 – use reference materials such as glossaries or dictionaries to help them use

the new language. 32 – take notes in class in the new language. 33 – make summaries of new language material. 34 – apply general rules to new situations when using the language. 35 - find the meaning of a word by driving the word into parts which I understand. 36 – look for similarities and contrasts between the new language and my own. 37 – try to understand what they have heard or read without translating it word-

by-word into their own language. 38 – be cautious about transferring words or concepts directly from their lan-

guage to the new language. 39 - look for patterns in the new language.



40 – develop their own understanding of how language works, even if sometimes they have to revise their understanding based on new information.


Part CThe book/teaching material I am using encourages my students:

41 – when they don’t understand all the words they read to guess the general mean-ing by using any clue they can find, for example, clues from the content situation.

42 – to read without looking up every unfamiliar word. 43 – to anticipate in a conversation what the other person is going to say based on

what has been said so far. 44 – to use gestures or switch back to their own language when they are speaking

and cannot think of the right expression. 45 – to ask the other person to tell them the right word if they cannot think of it

in a conversation. 46 – Find a different way to express the idea when they cannot think of the cor-

rect expression to say; for example, use a synonym to describe the idea. 47 – Make up new words if they don’t know the right ones. 48 – Direct the conversation to a topic of which they know the words.


Part DThe book/teaching material I am using encourages my students to:

49 – preview the language lesson to get a general idea of what it is about, how it is organized and how it relates to what they already know.

50 – try to concentrate on what any person speaking in the language say and put unrelated topics out of their minds.

51 – decide in advance to pay special attention to specific language aspects; for example, make them focus the way native speakers pronounce certain sounds.


54 RAGHDA EL ESSAWI

52 – try to find out all they can do about to be better learners by reading books or articles or by talking with others about how they learn.

53 – arrange their schedule to study and practice the new language consistently, not just when there is a pressure of a test.

54 – arrange any physical environment to promote learning; for instance, they find a quiet comfortable place to review.

55 – organize their language notebook to record important language information. 56 – plan their goals for language learning, for instance, how proficient they want

to become or how might they want to use the language in the long term. 57 – plan what they are going to accomplish in language learning each day or each

week. 58 – prepare for the upcoming learning task (such as giving a talk in the new

language) by considering the nature of the task, what they have to do and their current language skills.

59 – clearly identify the purpose of the language activity for instance, in a listen-ing task, they might need to listen for the general idea or for specific facts.

60 – take responsibilities for finding opportunities to practice new language. 61 – actively look for people with whom they can speak the new language. 62 – try to notice their language errors and find out the reasons for them. 63 – learn from their mistakes in using the new language. 64 – evaluate the general progress they have made in learning the language.


Part EThe book/teaching material I am using encourages my students to:

65 – try to relax whenever they feel anxious about using the new language. 66 – make encouraging statements for themselves so that they will continue to

try and do their best in the new language.



67 – actively encourage themselves to take wise risks in language learning, such as guessing meanings or trying to speak, even though they might make some mistakes.

68 – give themselves a tangible reward when they have done something well in the new language.

69 – pay attention to physical signs of stress that might affect their new language. 70 – keep a private diary or journal where they write their feelings about language

learning. 71 – talk to someone they trust about their attitudes and feelings concerning the

language learning process.

1. Never or almost never true of me 2. Generally not true of me 3. Somewhat true of me 4. Generally true of me 5. Always or almost always true of me

Part FThe book/teaching material I am using encourages my students to:

72 if they don’t understand, they ask the speaker to slow down, repeat, or clarify what was said.

73 ask other people to verify that they have understood or said something correctly. 74 ask other people to correct their pronunciation. 75 work with other language learners to practice, review, or share information. 76 have a regular language learner partner. 77 when my students are writing with a native speaker, try to let the natives know

when they need help. 78 in conversations with others in the new language, encourage them to ask

questions in order to be as involved as possible and to show that they are interested.

79 try to learn about the culture of the place where the new language is spoken. 80 pay close attention to the thoughts and feelings of other people with whom

they interact in the new language.


56 RAGHDA EL ESSAWI

Worksheet for Answering and Scoring the Strategy Inventory For Language Learning (SILL)

Part A Part B Part C Part D Part E Part FWhole SILL

Sum

1 - 16 - 41 - 49 - 65 - 72 -

2 - 17 - 42 - 50 - 66 - 73 -

3 - 18 - 43 - 51 - 67 - 74 -

4 - 19 - 44 - 52 - 68 - 75 -

5 - 20 - 45 - 53 - 69 - 76 -

6 - 21 - 46 - 54 - 70 - 77 -

7 - 22 - 47 - 55 - 71 - 78 -

8 - 23 - 48 - 56 - 79 -

9 - 24 - 57 - 80 -

10 - 25 - 58 -

11 - 26 - 59 -

12 - 27 - 60 -

13 - 28 - 61 -

14 - 29 - 62 -

15 - 30 - 63 -

31 - 64 -

32 -

33 -

34 -

35 -

36 -

37 -

38 -

39 -

40 -



References

Al-Amri Ibtesam. 2010. “Textbook Evaluation: An Evaluation Plan”. www .squ .edu .om/ Portals/ 28/ ... / textbookevaluaationIbtisamAl -Amri .pdf

Al-Sawi, Laila. 2010. “Pedagogical suggestions for the application of LLS in AFL classes and teaching material.” Paper presented at Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics (GURT), Washington, April 12.

Aytug, Seda. 2007. An EFL Textbook Evaluation Study in Anatolian High Schools: “New Bridge to Success for the 9th Grade New Beginners.” Masters thesis for the Graduate School of Education, Bikent University.

Brown, H. Douglas. 2007. Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. New York: Pearson Education.

Chamot, Anna Uhl. 2009. The CALLA Handbook: Implementing the Cognitive Academic Learning Approach. New York: Pearson Education.

Cohen, Andrew. 2001. “Preparing teachers for styles- and strategies-based instruction.” Paper presented at International Conference on Language Teacher Education, Minneapolis, MN, May 17–19.

Cope, C. , & Ward, P. 2002. “Integrating learning into classrooms: The importance of teachers’ perceptions. Educational Technology & Society. 5 (1): http:// www .ifets .info/ journals/ 5 _1/ cope .html

Ellis, Rod, quoted in Mohammad Rahimi, Abdolmehdi Riazi, and Shahrzad Seif. 2008. “An investigation into the factors affecting the use of language learning strategies by Persian EFL learners.” Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics 11:31–60.

Ellis, Rod, quoted in Carol Griffiths. 2003. “Patterns of language learning strategy use.” System 31(3): 367–83.

Flaitz, Jeffra, Carine Feyten, Sallie Fox, and Keya Mukherjee. 1995. “Raising general awareness of language learning strategies: A little bit goes a long way.” Hispania 78: 337–48.

Howe, Mary, Sirpa Grierson, and Mark Richmond, quoted in Sherry Kragler, Carolyn Walker, and Linda Martin. 2005. “Strategy instruction in primary content textbooks.” Reading Teacher 59(3): 254–61. http:// search .ebscohost .com/ login .aspx ?direct = true & db = a9h & AN = 18722495 & site = ehost -live

Gass, Susan, and Larry Selinker. 2001. Second Language Acquisition. London: LEA.Griffiths, Carol. 2003. “Patterns of language learning strategy use.” System 31(3):367–83.———. 2007. “Language learning strategies: Students’ and teachers’ perceptions.” ELT Journal

61(2): 91–99.Hadely, Alice Omaggio. 2001. Teaching Language in Context. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.Kadah, Raghad B. 2005. Learning Strategy Instruction in the Foreign Language Class: An Explor-

atory Study of Strategy Instruction for Reading Comprehension in Arabic in the United States. PhD diss., George Washington University.

Khaldieh, Salem A. 2000. “Learning strategies and writing processes of proficient vs. less-proficient learners of Arabic.” Foreign Language Annals 33(5): 522–34.

Khalil, Aziz. 2003. “Assessment of the use of language learning strategies of American learners of Arabic as a foreign language.” Al-’Arabiyya 36: 27–47.

Kirkgoz, Yasemin. 2009. “Evaluating the English textbooks for young learners of English at Turkish primary education.” Procedia 1(1): 79–83.

Kleinsasser, Robert, quoted in Mayumi Parry. 2000. “How ‘communicative’ are introductory undergraduate level Japanese language textbooks?” Japanese Studies 20(1): 89–101.


58 RAGHDA EL ESSAWI

Kragler, Sherry, Carolyn Walker, and Linda Martin. 2005. “Strategy instruction in primary con-tent textbooks.” Reading Teacher 59(3): 254–61. http:// search .ebscohost .com/ login .aspx ?direct = true & db = a9h & AN = 18722495 & site = ehost -live

Leavell, Alexandra G., and Kyungsim Hong-Nam. 2006. “Language learning strategy use of ESL students in an intensive English learning context.” System 34: 399–415.

Manchon, Rosa M. 2008. “Taking strategies to the foreign language classroom: Where are we now in theory and research.” IRAL 46 (2008): 221–43.

McDonough, Jo, and Christopher Shaw. 1993. Materials and Methods in ELT: A Teacher’s Guide. United Kingdom: Hartnolls Ltd.

Moskowitz, Gertrude. 1979. Caring and Sharing in the Foreign Language Class. New York: New-bury House Publishers.

Nakatani, Y. 2005. “The effects of awareness-raising training on oral communication strategy use.” Modern Language Journal 89 (i): 76–91.

Nation, Paul. 1994. New Ways in Teaching Vocabulary. Alexandria, VA: TESOL, Inc.O’Malley J. Michael, quoted in Anna Uhl Chamot. 2009. The CALLA Handbook: Implementing

the Cognitive Academic Learning Approach. New York: Pearson Education.O’Malley J. Michael, Anna Uhl Chamot, Gloria Stwner-Manzanares, Lisa Kupper, and Rocco

Russo, quoted in Anna Uhl Chamot. 2009. The CALLA Handbook: Implementing the Cogni-tive Academic Learning Approach. New York: Pearson Education.

Oxford, Rebecca. 1990. Language Learning Strategies: What Every Teacher Should Know. New York: Newbury House Publishers.

———. 2003. “Language learning strategies in a nutshell: Update and ESL suggestions”. In Methodology in Language Teaching, edited by Jack Richards and Willy Renandya, 124–34. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Oxford, Rebecca, and Madeline Ehrman. 1995. “Adult’s language learning strategies in an inten-sive foreign language program in the United States.” System 23: 359–86.

Oxford, Rebecca, and Judith Burry-Stock. 1995. “Assessing the use of language learning strate-gies worldwide with the ESL/EFL version of the Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL).” System 23: 1–23.

Oxford, Rebecca, Yunkyoung Cho, Santoi Leung, and Hae-Jin Kim. 2004. “Effect of the presence and difficulty of task on strategy use: An exploratory study.” IRAL 42: 1–47.

Parry, Mayumi. 2000. “How ‘communicative’ are introductory undergraduate level Japanese language textbooks?” Japanese Studies 20 (1): 89–101.

Rahimi, Mohammad, Abdolmehdi Riazi, and Shahrzad Seif. 2008. “An investigation into the factors affecting the use of language learning strategies by Persian EFL learners.” Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics 11: 31-60.

Rahimpour, Massoud, Raheleh Hashemi. 2011. “Textbook selection and evaluation in EFL con-text.” World Journal of Education vol.1 no. 2: 62

Riasati, Mohammad Javad, Pezhman Zare. 2010. “Textbook evaluation: EFL teachers’ perspec-tives on “New Interchange” (English as a foreign language) (Report) Studies in Literature and Language. Candadian Academy of Oriental & Occidental Culture. HighBeam Researh http:// www .highbeam .com

Rubdy, Rani. 2003. “Selection of material.” In Developing Materials for Language Teaching, edited by Brian Tomlinson, 37–57. London: Cromwell Press.

Saleh, Saleh M. 2000. Cognitive and Metacognitive Learning Strategies Used by Adult Learners of Arabic as a Foreign Language. PhD diss. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.

Salem, N. 2006. “ The Role of Motivation, Gender and Language Learning Strategies in EFL Profi-ciency.” MA.Thesis. The American University of Beirut.



Serry, Siham. 2010. “Language learning strategies: What teachers encourage most/least at vari-ous levels.” Paper presented at Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics (GURT), Washington, DC, April 12.

Sheory, Ravi, quoted in Alexandra.G. Leavell and Kyungsim Hong-Nam. 2006. “Language learning strategy use of ESL students in an intensive English learning context.” System 34: 399–415.

Spor, M & B. Schneider. 1999. “Content reading strategies: What teachers know, use, and want to learn”. Reading Research and Instruction 38 (3): 221-231

Turner, J. quoted in Carol Griffiths. 2003. “Patterns of language learning strategy use.” System 31(3): 367–83.

Wharton, Glenn, quoted in Alexandra.G. Leavell and Kyungsim Hong-Nam. 2006. “Language learning strategy use of ESL students in an intensive English learning context.” System 34: 399–415.

Yacout, Shahira. 2010. “Language learning strategies used by advanced and elementary learners in AFL classes.” Paper presented at Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics (GURT), Washington, DC, April 12.



Al-ʾArabiyya, 46 (2013), 61–80

Abstract

The present research tackles anxiety as one of the factors that affect the success or failure of foreign language (FL) learning. Previous research investigated the negative effect of too much anxiety on students’ learning process, and thus, poor performance and failure to progress. The present research is on reading anxiety that occurs through all the learn-ing stages, namely, input, processing, and output. Considerable focus is given to one of the top-down reading strategies that have helped to reduce anxiety, besides being used extensively in readers’ first languages, namely, the strategy of visualization. By visualiza-tion, it is meant to have the ability to create images in the mind, in other words, to person-alize texts. Visualization differs from one student to the other, thus, bringing to text more experience as well as helping to reduce students’ reading anxiety. For the purpose of the present research, visualization activities are developed and employed in the elementary, intermediate, and advanced Arabic as a foreign language (AFL) classes. These activi-ties are divided into: pre-reading activities, during-reading activities, and post-reading activities. The present research concludes that such activities help in utilizing students’ top-down strategies rather than concentrating only on decoding using bottom-up ones. Through visualization strategies students’ learning performance showed improvement, thus, reducing reading anxiety.

From Theory to PracticeDeveloping a “Visualization Strategy”

for Reducing AFL Students’ Reading Anxiety

Dalal Abo El Seoud and Mona Kamel Hassan, American University in Cairo


62 DALAL ABO EL SEOUD AND MONA KAMEL HASSAN

Introduction

Considerable researchers studied factors that are seen as the most important influences on foreign language (FL) learning success or failure. Among those factors are personal-ity variables, motivation, anxiety, attitudes, language learning strategies, etc. The present research concentrates on one of these factors, which is anxiety, specifically, anxiety in read-ing. Anxiety that can impede students’ language production and achievement. Anxious students may learn less and may experience failure in foreign language classes. Anxiety may also result in problems related to self-confidence and language proficiency, as previ-ously stated by various researchers in von Wörde (2003). This paper looks into reasons causing this anxiety from the perspectives of both linguists and foreign language learners. Visualization as a means to reduce students’ reading anxiety is given special focus.

Literature Review and Theoretical Background

Koba, Ogawa, and Wilkinson (2000, 1) define anxiety as “a state of uneasiness and apprehension or fear caused by the anticipation of something threatening.” Scovel (1991) (cited in Koba, Ogawa, and Wilkinson 2000) previously noted that students’ poor performance may be caused by too much anxiety. Horwitz et al. (1991) (cited in Koba, Ogawa, and Wilkinson 2000) further observed that based on Krashen’s affective filter, when students are anxious, they do not receive input and accordingly they fail to progress in their language acquisition. Koba, Ogawa, and Wilkinson (2000) also noted that when learning a foreign language, learners may have anxiety, regardless of their native culture. Jackson (2002) (cited in Williams and Andrade 2008) states that students refuse to participate in classroom discussions due to anxiety as well as personal factors. MacIntyre and Gardner (1991) (cited in Burden 2005) previously observed that an anxious stu-dent is characterized by refusing to participate voluntarily in classroom activities, has uncomfortable experience learning an L2, is always fearful of making mistakes, and is not willing to try any new linguistic forms. In an attempt to investigate reasons provoking anxiety in FL classes, Price (1991) (cited in Koba, Ogawa, and Wilkinson 2000) reports that students become very anxious when (1) speaking the foreign language in front of their colleagues, and (2) making mis-takes in their pronunciation, at which their colleagues laugh. Furthermore, Kondo and Yang (2003) (cited in Williams and Andrade 2008) found speaking activities, students’ low proficiency, and classmates’ negative evaluation as the main factors for causing anxiety. Language anxiety is influenced by situational variables and learners’ variables. Williams and Andrade note that “situational variables, for example, course level, course organization, course activities, instructor behavior and attitudes, and social interaction among learners” (2008, 183) have been examined in previous research. They further add that the study of learner variables that “include, ability, age, attitudes, beliefs, culture, gender, learning styles, and personality variables among others” (2008, 183) have also received the attention of several researchers.


From Theory to Practice 63

Buck (2001) (cited in Chang and Read 2008) also explains that students’ language anxiety increases when they are neither familiar with the vocabulary nor with the topic to be discussed in the target language. In their study, Williams and Andrade (2008) summarize situations that provoke anxiety as reported in their students’ responses to a questionnaire as follows: (1) students being anxious when the teacher selects them randomly, others become anxious with the teacher’s predictable order, (2) when deliver-ing a speech in front of their classmates, (3)inability to express themselves in the target language, (4) making grammatical mistakes and pronunciation errors, and (5) fear of negative evaluation in the eyes of the teacher (187). While examining the occurrence of anxiety in FL classes, Williams and Andrade (2008) stated that anxiety may occur within the learning stages, namely, input, process-ing, and output. Thus, they suggest that focus should not only be on factors that provoke anxiety but also on the learning process stages. Accordingly, several linguists provide a number of recommendations targeted toward reducing anxiety in FL classes. Price (1991) (cited in Koba, Ogawa, and Wilkinson 2000) suggests that if the teachers’ aim is to reduce their learners’ anxiety, these teachers should not criticize their students’ pronunciation errors. Teachers should also make it clear that the classroom is the suitable place for students’ learning and communication, thus stu-dents should be encouraged to make mistakes in class. Obsoe et al. (2007) (cited in Wil-liams and Andrade 2008) also stated that students’ group activities reduce anxiety. Fur-thermore, Williams and Andrade (2008, 187) suggest “confidence-building activities” that help students show their individual strengths. Teachers should adopt techniques so as to reduce their students’ anxiety. When asking students questions, teachers should increase “wait-time” for them to respond. When students have difficulty responding, teachers should give hints “to elicit a successful response.” To avoid embarrassment when failing to answer questions, students should be encouraged to say “I really do not know,” “Maybe someone else can answer that,” or “Could you help me?” Waxler (2010) goes further to suggest that students should even have pass options, so they know that they have the right not to reply if they do not know the answer. Kuru-Gonen (2005) indicates that anxiety affects the acquisition of all language skills, especially reading, causing intervention in the reading process that “ turns read-ing into an unpleasant experience for students” (p.54). Accordingly, the researchers will focus on the reading skill, providing the means to build up self-confidence, and thus eliminating anxiety related to it.

Reading Anxiety in FL Classes

To shed light on reasons that provoke anxiety in FL reading classes, Saito, Garza, and Hor-witz (1999) reported their students’ responses on a questionnaire eliciting this phenom-enon. Students’ reading anxiety increases when (1) they don’t understand what they are reading, (2) they understand words but not what the author wants to say, (3) they do not remember what they read, (4) they deal with unfamiliar writing scripts, (5) they are not familiar with the reading topic and the cultural background, (6) they do not understand



every word they read, (7) they cannot pronounce what they are reading, and (8) they get past the different script, but they cannot remember what they have already read. To overcome such causes of anxiety, Hansen (2010) recommends training students on decoding skills. He adds that such training could lead to word automaticity, which in turn enables students to recognize words sufficiently. To achieve this, Hansen suggests exposing beginning readers to simple texts, to be able to focus on “word recognition alone” rather than having them deal with top-down analytical strategies at this stage. Going beyond decoding words stage, studies on L1 and L2 recommend “strategy training” as a means to improve learners’ reading comprehension while using authen-tic texts. Focus of these studies has been on encouraging students to “replicate discrete information from the text to predict as they read, analyze their reading style, skim, scan, and guess a word meanings from context.” Results revealed that such strategies helped students to “comprehend better” the reading text (Barnett 1988b; Lyons 1985 [cited in Swaffar, Arens, and Byrnes 1991, 63-64]). Mughazy (2008) states that, in their read-ing process, readers adopt a bottom-up strategy or a top-down strategy. The bottom-up strategy refers to students’ attempt to derive information that appeared in the printed text through their techniques and cognitive skills. On the other hand, the top-down strategy refers to the use of students’ background knowledge to either guess meanings of difficult words or to support or oppose the writer’s intentions. Brustad (2006) adds that these two main reading skills should not be used separately, but rather, interactively, so that students could be able to deal with authentic texts rather than simplified ones. She also suggests that students should approach reading first by strategies dealing with essential vocabulary, followed by global understanding of the text. Here, strategies of skipping unknown words and being able to “guess, infer and decode,” not paying atten-tion to each word should be taken into consideration. Brown (2001) emphasizes what he calls “intrinsic motivation” as a reading strategy that teachers should train students to use. Brustad (2006) states that this could take place through activities that deal with problemsolving, where students use the information in their texts rather than repeat facts or ideas stated by the writer. Relating texts to the real world is what she calls “prob-lematizing.” Accordingly, one of the ways to reduce anxiety by encouraging such skills and strategies is to use the visualization strategy, which is elaborated in the next section.

Reducing Reading Anxiety Using Visualization Activities in Arabic as a Foreign Language (AFL) Classes

Saito, Garza, and Horwitz (1999) state that “although reading plays a substantial role in the second language curriculum, there has been relatively little discussion of anxiety and second language reading” (203). This was previously stated by Vande Berg (1993), who notes that teachers should give ample attention when preparing their students for different reading tasks. Visualization, although not given enough attention as indicated by Tomlinson (2003), is one of the strategies employed in FL classes that aim at reducing reading anxi-ety. Tomlinson (1998) defines visualization as the ability to make mental representation



of what is read as well as sounds and feelings for the setting and the characters in the text. It further makes connections and relations between the reader and the information in the text, relating it to other texts, previous experience, and the real world. Swaffar, Arens, and Byrnes (1991) also explain that a student communicates information, then becomes able to narrate and describe through visualization. They add that the use of scenarios and pictures is an example of visualization activities. Looking into cognitive theory and neuroscience, we find some light is being shed on this strategy as a recent way to deal with reading problems and difficulties, as it encompasses personalizing information, making predictions, asking questions, and expressing feelings, thus encouraging critical thinking. In other words, the learner is using a top-down strategy to overcome linguistic difficulties. At the same time as the learner is thinking about his own way of thinking, in terms of how to connect to text, how to connect to previous experience, how to con-nect to other texts, and how to connect to the real world, he is utilizing his metacognitive strategies. Such synthesizing could be developed through the use of visualization where “proficient learners spontaneously and purposefully create images while and after they read” (Keene and Zimmermann 1997, 196). Hunt and Vipond (1987) previously referred to visualization as being a part of aes-thetic reading. That is, learning through having a nearly virtual experience with subject matter. In other words, the reader should completely indulge himself in whatever he is reading; participate in the events, react with the characters, and have feelings and opinions for all its aspects. Keene and Zimmerman (1997) also indicate that helping students gain such visualization strategies is of great importance in fostering reading comprehension, as it makes students more engaged in their reading as they “use their imagery to draw conclu-sions, create interpretations of the text, and recall significant details, and to recall the plot or story or information long after it was read” (196). Such imageries “emerge from all five senses and the emotions and are anchored in learners’ prior knowledge” (196). Furthermore, Sadoski and Paivio (1991) (cited in Lin and Chen 2007) present a dual coding model of comprehensive theory showing cognition to consist of either a verbal system for language (lexis, grammar) or a nonverbal system of language (visual-ization: sensory and imagery). Accordingly, this research focuses on encouraging students to use this nonverbal code, namely, visualization, which Marzano, Pickering, and Pollock (2004) call a “non-linguistic strategy,” in order to improve the verbal code. By that students will be devel-oping their high level decoding of their reading skill starting from elementary levels in Arabic as an L2. Such strategies involving imagination and creativity are not being given enough emphasis or attention by developers in most second language materials. The question now is: do FL learners use this visualization strategy to improve their reading skills? Fathman et al. (1985) mention that although L1 readers visualize signifi-cantly, L2 readers concentrate on very low levels of decoding while reading. Although research calls for using both bottom-up and top-down strategies at the same time for reading skills, it is found that students depend heavily only on bottom-up strategies, in other words, on very low levels of decoding. This is manifested by what we find in most classes and with all levels semester after another as we see students translating all Arabic words into their own languages.



Sometimes this takes place so extensively that the Arabic text is no longer seen. This, in turn, means that these students have spent hours and hours at home looking up words in the dictionary; a strategy that is both exhausting and time wasting. Tomlinson (1998) describes this situation “in second language reading the norm is studial reading in which processing energy is often devoted to low level decoding and to cognitive strategies of comprehension” (277). He also blames coursebook authors and teachers for this as he says that all questions and activities following reading lessons depend on complete com-prehension. Consequently, in order to avoid embarrassment and anxiety, students resort to such low level of decoding. Masuhara (2003) describes trapping students in activities that highlight only com-prehension and language correction as discouraging because it prevents discovering stu-dents’ “inner speech” freely. Consequently, it prevents creativity and forces learners to be on a low level of linguistic decoding. He also believes that there should be a clear distinc-tion between teaching reading and teaching language using texts, as he says, “most of the reading materials try to kill two birds (language and reading) with one stone and seem to fail to hit both targets” (345) Tomlinson (1997) (cited in Tomlinson 1998) states that experiments that have been done covering more than 600 L2 learners show that students instructed to visualize outscored those who were not, and that such instruction had also helped them improve their performance as well as their confidence and compe-tence in reading. So, with the importance of visualization, the researchers of this paper have employed it as a tool to reduce students’ reading anxiety in FL classes. It has been employed to vari-ous levels, ranging from high elementary to intermediate and advanced classes of Arabic as a foreign language (AFL) at the American University in Cairo.

Teachers’ Role

Another question raised here, is how could we change learners’ dependency on merely low-level decoding to focus on higher levels of global understanding using previous experience, making inferences, and expressing opinions? It should be an activity that will make students more relaxed and motivated, since it will not depend merely on under-standing every word in the text, but rather on relating some of its points to themselves. To arrive at such a high level of decoding, it is important to combine the visual-ization strategy instruction with visualization strategy activities. This is because what usually happens in class is that teachers instruct their students to visualize but do not provide appropriate and systematic activities for that. Accordingly, the researchers present some of these visualization activities, for dif-ferent levels, that they have found to be of benefit to students. They also show some corresponding examples of students’ works.

Visualization ActivitiesFor the purpose of the present research, visualization activities are divided into preread-ing activities; during-reading activities; postreading activities. In such activities, students use all language skills in order to enhance reading.



Prereading visualization activities.Mnemonics.This is a basic visualization exercise that students are trained to use every time they have to deal with vocabulary items. They are given a list of words andthey have to think of two things for each word:

Relate its pronunciation to a word in their first language, andfind a connection between the L1 chosen word and the L2 meaning.

An example of this strategy has to be modeled to students beforehand. A clear example is that of the Arabic word ʡaga:za (vacation), when students were asked to find out a word that sounds like it, one student gave the English word “gas.” In asking about the rela-tionship that will make her remember that she chose this word, she said that she needs “gas” to go on an ʡaga:za (vacation). More examples are given in table 4.1.1 Although this method takes some time to be able to find L1 connections and images to go with the new L2 word, research indicates that no other technique works as well. The role of the teacher here is only to model this technique; otherwise, it is totally up to each learner to develop his or her own imaging.

Photos.Pit Corder (1966) (cited in Hill in Tomlinson 2003) differentiates between talking about a picture, which is the case with most of the activities found, and talking with a picture, bringing in personal feelings and real-world opinions about it. Accordingly, photos could be a good way to get learners to start visualizing. They are given a picture and are asked to interact with it rather than just describe what is in it. An example here is that of a family, where each student is asked to visualize himself as one of the members in it and start talking about other members, his likes, dislikes, and opinions of the others. Interestingly, most students chose to speak on behalf of the dog that was with the family. An example of a student’s writing is figure 4.1.

Sketching (in pencil or in mind):.This could be by drawing predictions of the text to be read, or during listening to the teacher read the text before they do. If illustrations were already available in text, stu-dents could first prepare their drawings and then compare them with the given ones,

Table 4.1 An example of how students make up mnemonics.

a-sounds like: min far , because he is farb- sounds like : month, one month exile

منفى

sounds like : more sill, because you need more sill to send out s.th. مرسلsounds like doctor , because a doctor writes his appointments in a notebook. دفرتa-sounds like spoon, used for eatingb- sounds like صابون, we was dishes with soap

صحون

sounds like Hayat water, you need water to stay alive أحياءsounds like رخيص,bread here is cheap رغيف



Figure 4.1 Using pictures to visualize.

Figure 4.2 Using sketching as a preactivity for reading.



taking into consideration different cultural differences. Sketching could also be done during reading and after reading. Sketching could be represented verbally by each stu-dent. Interactive discussions could then follow to find out how each student has sketched his or her own visualization internally. It could also be done by drawing. The example provided here comes before reading a part of Ahdaf Swaif ’s story xαriʈαti-lħubb “The Map of Love,” where she describes the bazaar. Students were asked to sketch their visu-alization of a bazaar (see figure 4.2).

Predicting.Students are given photos of characters and are asked to construct mind maps of all information they could possibly visualize about them. These maps are compared and a story is constructed before actually reading the text itself.

During-Reading Visualization Activities

Inventing SituationsWhile reading a lesson about the weather, a good visualization activity could be to visu-alize what students do on rainy days. An example is shown in figure 4.3.

Figure 4.3 Inventing situations through personalization.



Another example that relates to prior experience while reading a lesson on means of transportation, is to visualize yourself sitting in a bus and tell us what can you see sur-rounding you in the streets, etc. A student’s example is figure 4.4. Another exercise is to have a conversation between two members in a family while reading a lesson on family (see figure 4.5).

MimingStudents are given vocabulary items, well-known phrases and sayings, as well as situ-ations from texts being read, and are asked to mimic them to the class. Students start employing their visualization strategies to convey information to others. Such an activity always brings laughter and fun to students while enhancing their memory of keywords and concepts in their reading.

Verifying PredictionsPredictions were introduced as prereading activities. Once students start to read the texts, they start to verify their visualized predictions. A good example was again while

Figure 4.4 Inventing situations through imagining.



Figure 4.5 Inventing situations through creative conversations.



reading a part of Ahdaf Swaif ’s story “The Map of Love,” where students had to visualize the bazaar in sketching as well as in writingl. Figure 4.6 shows what a student wrote in comparing her predictions to what she actually found.

Postreading Visualization Activities

Any creative works are to be visualized after reading a text, story, poetry, remarks, thoughts, sketching, or role play.

a. New outcome: Having read aTTayyib Saleh’s story “Suzan and Ali,” students were asked to visualize another story with other reasons for separation between the two characters. An example of such a story is found in figure 4.7.

b. After reading several articles in a media class, students were supposed to use the information and visualize relating it to what is happening in the real world. Some students composed songs and sang them, others wrote poems (figure 4.8), and still others made sketches (figure 4.9).Here we see that each student has his or her own way to relate to real world.

c. Another example of relating what has been read about the time when the British occupation was in Egypt but referring to current situations is a remark found in figure 4.10.

d. A new outcome being created after reading Mahfuz’s short story ʡassiba:q “The Race,” along with another paragraph by him, shows how the student had combined what she felt from the texts and related them to the real world, expressing her opinions and feelings (figure 4.11).

e. A new output can be reflected by role play, where students choose parts of a poem and change it to a scene using visualization to make changes in it or com-bine it with another text and come up with a new output.

Figure 4.6 Visualizing for making predictions.



Figure 4.7 Visualizing for making story changes.



Figure 4.8 A poem visualizing a political situation.



After giving different kinds of visualization activities to students, an assessment rubric was given to them. Some comments and feedback received from students on the visual-ization strategy can be seen in the Aappendix.

In carrying out such activities, a point to be taken into consideration beforehand is that teachers and students should believe in what Brumfit (1986) (cited in Masuhara Masu-hara2003) says is essential for good readers to have the tolerance to deal with the uncer-tainty they face when reading. There should be a willingness to take chances, formulate hypotheses, and make mistakes before reading, and then confirm, refine, or reject and ver-ify all that while reading. From all of the above, it is seen that successful reading is demon-strated by the new output students produce, whether in writing, speaking, drawing, acting, etc., even though they may have not completely understood all words in their reading. Once students remember some necessary vocabulary and use it in some of their own visualized situations, combining it with their prior experience and the real world, then comparing it with their peers and interacting together in class, they will start to realize that reading the lesson on that topic does not need so much low-level decoding and does not constitute a heavy burden for them. So, until coursebook authors start to include visualization strategies in their mate-rial, it is the teachers’ role to come up with different visualization activities to help in reading comprehension in a systematic way, as it is a good means for training students to utilize the extensive bank of information inside them in order to be able to use top-down strategies for comprehension instead of entirely depending on the low decoding of the bottom-up ones.

Figure 4.9 A visualized sketch combining media vocabulary.

Figure 4.10 Using visualization to relate to real world to text.



Conclusion

From the visualization activities applied in AFL classes, it was found that students became capable of understanding their reading texts in spite of the unknown vocabulary items. They also overcame the burden of their unfamiliarity with the topic and its cul-tural background. In other words, students managed to relate some points in the text to

Figure 4.11 Using visualization to combine between two texts.



the real world as they discussed them with their peers. This interaction reduced anxiety and made their learning process more enjoyable. Thus, it is recommended to employ different visualization activities systematically. These activities are considered to be a good means to train students to utilize the exten-sive bank of information inside them. Accordingly, students will be able to use top-down strategies for comprehension instead of entirely depending on the low decoding of the bottom-up ones, a matter that reduces students’ anxiety. Finally, according to cognitive science, all brains contain mental representations or images that have to be consciously dealt with in order to perform higher-order think-ing skills. Accordingly, the researchers would like to end with what Gambrell and Jawitz (1993) state, that as mental images take place while reading, there will be an increased understanding of the texts.

Appendix: Students’ feedback on using the visualization strategy.

Please take a few minutes to answer this assessment rubric:

Yes No Reason

Do you visualize when you read in your own language?

Did you like the attempt of transferring this strategy to Arabic?

Did visualizing make you able to understand better?

Did sharing your visualization with your peers improve your comprehension?

Did you benefit from relating text to your own previous experience?

Did you benefit from relating text to other texts you have read?

Did you benefit from coming up with real world issues related to text?

Did you benefit from sketching one of the issues in the text?

Did acting a scene related to the text deepen your comprehension?

Did you remember some words better by doing the vocab. Exercise you did?



Yes No Reason

Would you like to deal with readings this way?

What did you like best in this activity?

Other comments:

A summary of some of the students’ answers:

• Helpsmebeinthestorymore• Helpsmetorelatetothecharacters• Ittrainsmybraintousemorevocabulary• Wecanexpandourvocabularybank• IwilltryanythingtohelpmelearnArabicbetter• Itplacestheideasinafamiliarcontext• Ifeelthatvocabularycanstayinyourheadbetterwhenyouvisualize• Itreallyallowsmetothinkoutsidetheboxandittrainsyourbraintorecycle

vocabulary• Ilikedbestrelatingtootherliteraryworks• Thekinestheticaspectoflearning,IreallylikethisbecauseIrememberbetter• Thevisualizationwasagoodidea• Ilikedbestcreatingmnemonicdevices

Note

1. The authors are grateful to their students for granting permission to use their work as examples. While they remain anonymous, permission has been granted by each student whose work is used.

References

Brown, H. Douglas.2007.”TEACHING by PRINCIPLES”. Pearson Education, Inc.Brustad, Kristen. 2006. “Reading fluently in Arabic.” In Handbook for Arabic Language Teaching

Professionals in the 21st Century, edited by Kassem Wahba, Zeinab Taha, and Liz England, 341–52. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Burden, Peter. 2005. “The Teacher as facilitator: Reducing anxiety in the EFL university class-room.” JALT Hokkaido Journal 8: 3–18.

Chang, Anna Ching-Shyang and John Read. 2008. “Reducing listening test anxiety through vari-ous forms of listening support.” Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language 12 (1).



Fathman, Ann, Stephanie L. Knight, Yolanda N. Padron, and Hersholdt C. Waxman. 1985. “The cognitive reading strategies of ESL students.” TESOL Quarterly 19: 789–92.

Gambrell, Linda B., and Paula Brooks Jawitz. 1993. “Mental imagery, text illustrations, and chil-dren’s story comprehension and recall.” Reading Research Quarterly 28: 264–76.

Hansen, Gunna Funder. 2010. “Word recognition in Arabic as a foreign language.” Modern Lan-guage Journal 94(4): 567–81.

Hunt, Russel, and Douglas Vipond. 1987. “Aesthetic reading: Some strategies for research.” English Quarterly 20(3): 178–83.

Lin, Huifen, and Tsuiping Chen. 2007. “Reading authentic EFL text using visualization and advance organizers in a multimedia learning environment.” Language Learning & Technology 11(3): 83–106.

Keene, Ellin Oliver, and Susan Zimmerman. 1997. Mosaic of Thought: Teaching Comprehension in a Reader’s Workshop. Hanover, NH: Heinemann.

Koba, Naomi, Naoyoshi Ogawa, and Dennis Wilkinson. 2000. “Using community language learning approach to cope with language anxiety.” The Internet TESL Journal.

Kuru- Gonen, Ipek (2005). The Sources of Foreign Language Reading Anxiety of Students in a Turkish EFL Context. Proceedings of the 5th WSEAS/IASME International Conference on Educational Technologies(EUDTE’09)

Masuhara, Hitomi. 2003. “Materials for developing reading skills.” In Developing Materials for Language Teaching, edited by Brian Tomlinson, 340–63. London: Continuum.

Marzano, Robert J., Debra J. Pickering, and Jane E. Pollock. 2004. Classroom Instruction that Works: Research-Based Strategies for Increasing Student Achievement. Alexandria, VA: Associa-tion for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Mughazy, Mustafa. 2008. “Reading despite ambiguity: The role of metacognitive strategies in reading Arabic authentic text.” Al-ʿArabiyya, 38–39: 57–74.

Saito, Yoshiko, Thomas J. Garza, &and Elaine K. Horwitz. 1999. “Foreign language reading anxi-ety.” The Modern Language Journal 83: 202–18.

Swaffar, Janet K., Katherine Arens, and Heidi Byrnes. 1991. Reading for Meaning: An Integrated Approach to Language Learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Tomlinson, Brian, ed. 1998. “Seeing what they mean: Helping L2 readers to visualize.” In Materi-als Development in Language Teaching, 256–78. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Tomlinson, Brian, ed. 2003Developing Materials For Language Teaching. Continuum Interna-tional Publishing Group

Vande Berg, Camille Kennedy.1993. Managing Learner Anxiety in in Literature. The French Review 76(1): 27-36 on Wörde, Renee. 2003. “Students’ perspectives on foreign language anxiety.” Inquiry 8 (1).

Waxler, A., 2010. Classroom Management: The Law of Least Intervention. Teaching Tips Machine, LLC.

Williams, Kenneth, and Melvin Andrade. 2008. “Foreign language learning anxiety in Japanese EFL university classes, causes, coping, and locus of control.” Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching 5(2): 18191.



Al-ʾArabiyya, 46 (2013), 81–108

مقدمة البحث ومشكلته

تنافر تحكم التي القواعد من عدد إىل الصحيح)1 الثاليث الفعل يف األصوات (تراكب عن دراستي خلصت األصوات العربية أو تآلفها،2 وتشري إىل أن وراء السلوك اللغوي التلقايئ للعربية نظاما داخليا يحدد النامذج بالقبول، ما هو جدير منها يقبل أن العريب للحس أتاح ما املقبولة، وهو النامذج غري املقبولة ومييزها عن

ويعرض عن سواه.)؛ ألرى هل يخضع هذا ، أم وفكرت يف أن أتجه إىل الفعل الثاليث املضعف املجرد,3 مثل األفعال (رد، فر النوع من األفعال لذلك النظام الداخيل الذي يفعل فعله يف تحديد املقبول وترك غريه ؟ وهل يكون ترصف الفعل املضعف عىل باب رصيف4 بعينه راجعا إىل سيطرة هذا النموذج املختزن يف املعجم الذهني العريب؟ وهل يكون ألحياز5 أصوات هذا النوع من األفعال ومخارجها أثر يف اتجاه الفعل للترصف عىل باب رصيف بعينه؟ وهل ميكن تتبع خيوط العالقات التي تؤثر يف ميل الفعل املضعف إىل الترصف عىل باب رصيف دون غريه ؟ أسئلة

راحت تلح عىل تفكريي فحاولت البحث عن إجابة لها.وبدأت بتتبع هذا النوع من األفعال الذي يتكون من صوتني؛ أللحظ هل يؤثر تجاور صوتيه يف ترصف مضارعه عىل باب رصيف بعينه، فوجدت أن (فاء الفعل)6 قد يكون واحدا يف بعض األفعال املضعفة، وعينه والمه مختلفان، والحظت أن املضارع يف كل منهام يختلف عن اآلخر يف الحركة، وهو ما يعني اختالف الباب الفعلني يف األول فالصوت ظل)، (ظن، ،[ʕæffæ] (عف) ،[ʕæbbæ] (عب) كاألفعال: ملضارعه، الرصيف األولني هو(العني) [ʕ]، والفعل املضارع منهام هو يعب [jæʕυbb]، يعف [jæʕiff]: فيترصف الفعل(عب) ) عىل باب (رضب). وهنا نجد أن اختالف الصوت الثاين يف الفعلني عىل باب (نرص)، ويترصف الفعل (عفأدى إىل اختالف بابهام الرصيف، مع مالحظة أن الصوت الثاين فيهام: (الباء) [b] و(الفاء) 7[f] من حيز واحد

هو حيز الشفتني.

أثر أصوات الفعل الثاليث املضعف يف بنيته الرصفيةدراسة في األصوات الشفهية

The Effect of Sounds in Geminate Verbs on Conjugation Patterns

a study of labials

أ. د. وفاء كامل فايد، كلية اآلداب- جامعة القاهرة

Wafaa Kamel Fayed


82 WAFAA KAMEL FAYED

هو: ومضارعهام ،[đ] (الظاء هو ([đællæ]ظل ،[đænnæ] ظن) الفعلني يف األول الصوت أن نجد كام (يظنjæ [υđnn]، يظل [jæđæll]): فيترصف الفعل (ظن) عىل باب (نرص)، ويترصف الفعل (ظل) عىل

باب (فتح)، عىل الرغم من أن (النون) [n] و(الالم) 8[l] من حيز واحد أيضا.تغري موقع صويت أن [bæʕʕæ] بع ،[ʕæbbæ]عب ،[læððæ] لذ ،[ðællæ] ذل األفعال: نلحظ يف كام املضعف يف الفعل املايض يؤدي إىل اختالف الباب الرصيف ملضارعه: فالفعل (يـذل) [jæðill] تأيت فيه الكرسة بعد (الذال)، فهو من باب (رضب)، والفعل (يلذ) [jælæðð] تأيت فيه الفتحة بعد (الالم)، فهو من باب (فتح). وكذلك الفعل (يعب) [jæʕυbb] تأيت فيه الضمة بعد (العني)، فهو من باب (نرص)، والفعل (يبع) [jæbІʕʕ] تأيت فيه الكرسة بعد (الباء)، فهو من باب (رضب). وهذا يشري إىل أن تغري موقع الصوتني هو

السبب يف اختالف الصيغة الرصفية للمضارع. ومن ثم رأيت أن أرصد جميع األفعال الثالثية املضعفة بالقاموس املحيط للفريوزابادي، متوخية بذلك أن يكتسب البحث طابع االستقصاء؛ يك يخلص من دراسة املعطيات الشاملة إىل صورة واضحة، ميكن أن تؤدي إىل تحليل دقيق؛ يفيض بنا إىل تلمس الطريق إىل إجابات شافية لتلك التساؤالت، وقد تساعدنا عىل معرفة بعض القواعد التي تزيح الغموض عن هذا الجانب، وتوضح لنا أثر تجاور صويت الفعل املضعف يف سلوكه عىل باب

رصيف بعينه، ومدى ارتباط أحياز أصوات املضعف ومخارجها بالباب الرصيف للفعل.ويدرس البحث حيز األصوات الشفهية،9 يف عالقتها بباقي األصوات الصامتة.

أهـداف البحـث:يهدف هذا البحث إىل محاولة اإلجابة عن التساؤالت التالية:

هل يؤثر حيز كل من صويت الفعل املضعف يف ورود الفعل عىل باب رصيف بعينه ؟ -1 هل كانت أحياز األصوات ومخارجها صفة حاكمة يف اختيار الباب الرصيف للمضعف عىل لسان -2

العرب القدامى ؟ عىل مستوى حيز الشفتني: هل تكون الصفة الحاكمة إليثار الفعل بابا رصفيا بعينه، لالتحاد يف -3

مخرج أصوات الحيز أم لالختالف فيه ؟هل ميكن تلمس بعض القواعد التي تحكم السلوك الرصيف للفعل الثاليث املضعف الذي يكون أحد -4

صوتيه من حيز الشفتني ؟

ونبدأ برصد الدراسات السابقة يف هذا الجانب، فنسجل معالجة النحاة واللغويني القدامى للموضوع:

موقف النحاة القدامى من الفعل الثاليث املضعف: حني تناول النحاة الفعل الثاليث املضعف رأوا أن التضعيف يثقل عىل ألسنتهم.10 وذهب بعضهم إىل أن (يفعل)- ه يشده)، أكرث من (يفعل)- بكرس العني- الذي بضم العني- يف املضعف املتعدي، (كام يف: رده يرده، وشدهو قليل محفوظ يف املضعف،11 كام يف: (حب اليشء يحبه). كام رأى الجوهـري والفـراء وآخرون لزوم الكسـر ه )، ولزوم الضـم يف املضاعف املتعدي،(كام يف: مد يف املضاعف غري املتعدي، (كام يف: جف يجف، وكل يكلميده)؛ ألن الضامئر املنصوبة تتصل كثريا بهذا النوع من األفعـال، فلو كرس لزم الخروج من كرسة إىل ضمتني

متتاليتني، وهذا ثقيل عىل اللسان.12فحديث النحاة وبعض اللغويني القدماء عن الباب الرصيف للفعل املضعف ارتبط – يف رأيهم – بتعدي الفعل

ولزومه.وقد حاولت الدراسة اختبار صحة هذا الرأي فتتبعت خمسني فعال مضعفا13؛ لرتى حركة عني املضارع فوجدت القدماء– ذكر كام الالزم-14 يف وكرسها املتعدي يف املضارع عني ضم من التحقق وتحاول فيها، أن(يفعل - بضم العني - [jæfʕul]: أىت متعديا فحسب يف اثني عرش فعال، وأىت الزما فحسب يف عرشة أفعال، كام ورد الزما ومتعديا يف تسعة عرش فعال منها، ومل تترصف مثانية أفعال من العينة عىل باب (نرص)، ومل ترد


The Effect of Sounds in Geminate Verbs on Conjugation Patterns 83

صيغة املضارع من فعل واحد منها. لذا مل تطمنئ الباحثة إىل ربط الباب الرصيف للفعل الثاليث املضعف بحالته من حيث التعدي واللزوم.

موقف اللغويني القدامى من الفعل الثاليث املضعف: ظهر عند اللغويني اتجاه مختلف عن اتجاه النحاة، فهو يربط بنية الكلمة مبخارج أصواتها، فيجعل أصوات الكلمة تؤثر يف تركيبها الرصيف؛ بحيث ال ميكن تكوين كلمة من أصوات متقاربة املخرج،15 فال تتكون كلمة من القاف [q] مع الكاف [k] مثال: فليس يف كالم العرب (قك) وال (كق)، وكذلك ال تجتمع الجيم [ʤ] مع [z] والزاي [ď] والضاد [θ] والثاء [s] فليس يف العربية (جك) وال (كج)، وكذلك ال ترتكب السني ،[k] الكاف

مع بعضها يف كلمة عربية.نلحظ هذا االتجاه يف مقدمتي معجمي (العني) و(جمهرة اللغة): فقد أشار الخليل إىل أن العلة يف تعذر نطق

األصوات هي قرب مخارجها يف الكلمة، وهو ما دعا العرب إىل إهامل بعض الكلامت.16إذا منها اللسان عىل أثقل كانت مخارجها تقاربت إذا أن”الحروف فرأى دريد ابن ذلك يف وتبعه تباعدت”،17 وذكر أن” أحسن األبنية عندهم أن يبنوا بامتزاج الحروف املتباعدة. وإن أراد العرب الجمع بني حرفني من مخرجني متقاربني بدأوا باألقوى منهام وأخروا األلني، كام يف (وتد): التي بدأوا فيها بالتاء [t] قبل الدال [d]؛ ألن (التاء) تنقطع بجرس قوي، و(الدال) تنقطع بجرس لني، وكذلك يف (ورل) بدأوا بالراء [r] قبل الالم [l]؛ ألن الراء تنقطع بجرس قوي، والالم تنقطع بغنة. ويؤيد ذلك أيضا أن صعوبة الالم يف النطق عىل

اللسان أقل من صعوبة نطق الراء؛ وذلك للني الالم.”18ومل يحدد ابن دريد معايري لقياس القوة واللني والصعوبة يف الحروف.

األصوات واملستهجن يف املستحسن الكلامت، وحدد بناء يف العرب نهج إىل فنبه ابن جني19 وتابعهام التأليف عىل ثالثة أرضب: أحدها تأليف املتباعدة، وهو األحسن. واآلخر: املتجاورة حني قال: “ الحروف يف تضعيف الحرف نفسه، وهو ييل القسم األول يف الحسن. واآلخر تأليف املتجاورة، وهو دون االثنني األولني، فإما رفض البتة وإما قل استعامله”. كام ذكر أن القياس أال يتآلف الحرفان من مخرجني متجاورين، وإن تجشم العرب ذلك بدأوا باألقـوى منهام “، وذلك نحو (أرل) و(ورل)، و(وتد) و(محتد)، فبدأوا بالراء قبل الالم ،

وبالتاء قبل الدال ؛ ألنهام أقوى منهام.”20ومل يحدد ابن جني أيضا معيار قوة الحرف أو ضعفه، ولكن كالمه يفهم أن الراء [r] أقوى من الالم [l]والنون

.[d] أقوى من الدال [ţ]والطاء[t]والتاء ،[z]22 والزاي[s] والسني[ş] والشني [∫] أقوى من الصاد ،[n]21

وأشار ريض الدين االسرتاباذي إىل أثر مخارج بعض الحروف يف الصائت vowel التايل لعني املضارع من الفعل الصحيح، حني ذكر أن األصوات التي من مخرج الواو [w]، كالباء [b] وامليم 23[m] ال تغري الحركة التي تأيت بعد عني مضارع الفعل الثاليث الصحيح إىل الضمة [υ]، برغم أن الضمة تناسب الواو يف النطق. وكذلك األصوات التي من مخرج الياء، كالجيم [ʤ] والشني [∫] ال تغري الحركة التي تيل عني مضارع الفعل الثاليث الصحيح إىل الكرسة [I]، برغم أن الكرسة تناسب الياء يف النطق. وذلك خالفا ملا يحدث مع أصوات الحلق24 التي تيل الفتحة عني مضارعها، يف مثل: لجأ يلجأ، دهك يدهك، بلع يبلع، رحل يرحل، بخس يبخس، لدغ يلدغ، ونصه:

“ ثم إن الحروف التي من مخرج الواو، كالباء وامليم، من رضب يرضب وصب يصب، ونسم ينسم وحمل الياء، كالجيم يحمل، ال تغري كرس العني إىل الضم الذي هو من مخرج الواو، وكذا الحروف التي من مخرج والشني، يف شجب يشجب ومجن ميجن ومشق ميشق، ال تحول ضم العني إىل الكرس الذى هو من مخرج الياء، كام فعل حرف الحلق بالضمة والكرسة؛ ألن موضعي الواو والياء مبنزلة حيز واحد؛ لتقارب ما بينهام واجتامعهام يف االرتفاع عن الحلق، فكأن الحروف املرتفعة كلها من حيز واحد، بخالف املستفلة- أي الحلقية- وأيضا فتحنا الثاليث الفعل وتنافرها يف األصوات تآلف .”25 كام خلصت دراسة الفتحة بخفة الحلقية ثقل لتعديل هناك

الصحيح إىل عدد من األسس التي تحكم تراكب األصوات26 يف اللغة العربية.ومن هنا حاولت هذه الدراسة أن تتعمق يف اختبار هذا االتجاه اللغوي الذي يربط البنية الرصفية للكلمة أكان الباب الرصيف ملضارعه، سواء املضعف عىل الثاليث الفعل أثر أصوات تتحقق من مبخارج أصواتها؛ ليك

الصوت فاء للفعل أم عينا والما له، وهو جانب مل يدرس من قبل، فيام أعلم.



عيـنة البحـث

<اعتمدت الباحثة (القاموس املحيط( للفريوزابادي الستقصاء األفعال الثالثية املضعفة التى وردت به27، لغزارة الرصيف الباب بتحديد التزامه إىل جانب بالشكل، كلامته ولحرصه عىل ضبط حروف اختصاره، مع مادته28

ألفعاله بربطها بأوزان األفعال املعروفة.

خـطوات البحـث:استقصت الباحثة األفعال الثالثية الصحيحة املضعفة العني والالم التي وردت بالقاموس املحيط، ـ

وسجلتها مع ترصيفاتها يف جدول خاص ارتكز عليه البحث. وحني وردت بعض األفعال بالقاموس بصيغة املايض دون املضارع، استكمل مضارعها من لسان العرب البن منظور؛ حرصا عىل التثبت من

الباب الرصيف.ومن األفعال املرصودة يف الجدول السابق رصدت الباحثة ترصف الفعل الثاليث املضعف الصحيح حني ـ

تكون أصوات حيز الشفتني فاء له، وتتغري أصوات عينه والمه: جدول(1).ومن الجدول (1) سجلت ترصف املضعف الثاليث الصحيح حني تكون أصوات حيز الشفتني عينا ـ

والما له وتتغري أصوات فائه، ورتبت حروف فاء املضعف ألفبائيا؛ حتى ميكن أن يظهر أثر حيز عني املضعف والمه- دون فائه- يف إيثار الفعل بابا رصفيا بعينه: جدول (2).

ثم أعادت الباحثة ترتيب بيانات الجدول (2)، بحيث رتبت فيه فاء املضعف وفقا ألحيازها؛ وذلك ـ يك تتبني ما إذا كان إيثار الفعل لباب رصيف بعينه- وفقا ملا ظهر بالجدول (2)- ميتد إىل أصوات فاء الفعل التي يضمها حيز واحد، أم أن هذا االتجاه يختص به صوت بعينه أو أكرث من صوت يف الحيز

الواحد، دون أن ميتد إىل باقي أصوات الحيز: جدول رقم (3).

املصـطـلحـات:قبل عرض نتائج البحث يلزم أن نحدد منظومة املصطلحات املستخدمة فيه وهي:

:Point of articulation املخرجهوالنقطة التي يلتقي عندها عضوان أو أكرث من أعضاء النطق ليمر هواء الزفري بينهام، ويتـشكل الصوت، فالباء[b] وامليم[m] مخرجهام من الشفتني bilabial، والقاف [q] لهوي uvular، والسني [s] أسيل

.alveolar (من نصل29 اللسان مع أصول األسنان):range of articulation30 الحيـز

مساحة تشتمل عىل أكرث من مخرج، وتكون املخارج فيها متقاربة، وتشرتك األصوات التي تنتمي إىل حيز واحد عادة يف خصائص جامعة. وميثله حيز األصوات الحلقية Pharyngeal الذي يضم ثالثة مخارج: (الهمزة [ʔ] والهاء [h] ومخرجهام أقىص الحلق، والعني [ʕ] والحاء [ħ] ومخرجهام وسط الحلق،

والغني [γ] والخاء [x] ومخرجهام أدىن الحلق(.

[s] مير معه هواء الزفري يف الحنجرة دون اهتزاز للوترين الصوتيني، مثل السني :voiceless الصوت املهموس.interdental بني األسناين [θ] والثاء ،labiodental الشفهي األسناين [f] األسيل، والفاء

الصوت المجهور voiced: يحدث معه اندفاع هواء الزفري من الحنجرة مسببا تذبذبا منتظام شديدا يف .interdental بني األسناين [ð] والذال ، alveolar األسيل [z] الوترين الصوتيني، مثل الزاي

اإلطبـاق velarisation: يرتفع فيه مؤخر اللسان إىل الحنك األعىل آخذا شكال مقعرا؛ مام يزيد من حجم تجويف الفم، ويضيق من حجم تجويف الحلق، فيسمع الصوت مفخام. وميثل األصوات املطبقة الصاد

.[ţ] والطاء النطعي [ď] والضاد الشجري ،[ş] alveolar األسيل



االنفتاح nonvelarisation31: عكس اإلطباق، ويكون تجويف الفم مع الصوت املنفتح أقل منه مع نظريه املطبق، ومن أمثلته: الكاف [k] من الحنك اللني velar ، والتاء [t] والدال [d] من نصل اللسان مع

.alveolar أصول األسنان، وهام من األصوات النطعية عند القدماء

األصوات املتوسطة 32)املوائع( liquids: تنطق بالتقاء عضوي النطق التقاء تاما، ولكن النفس يجد له مخرجا إىل الخارج، فيمر الهواء دون أن يحدث أي نوع من الصفري أو الحفيف املسموع، ومنها: الالم[l] والنون

[n] والراء [r]، وكذلك العني [ʕ]- وفقا لرأي سيبويه.33

كتاب يف ورد كام الصامتة، لألصوات ترتيبه34 واتبعت الخليـل، مصطلحات الباحثة استخدمت وقد (العني)، وأضافت إليه الهمزة برتتيب سيبويه، فقسمت الصوامت إىل املجموعات التاليـة:

:([х] خ -[γ] غ -[ħ] ح -[ʕ] ع -[h] هـ -[ʔ] أ) Pharyngeal 1- أصوات الحلق ويضم حيزها ثالثة مخارج، أولها: مخرج صوتني من أقىص الحلق، هام الهمزة والهاء35، والثاين مخرج صوتني من وسط الحلق، هام العني والحاء، والثالث مخرج صوتني من أدىن الحلق، هام الغني والخاء.

velar ([K] ـ ك [q] ق) :صوتا اللهاة والحنك األعىل -2 .velar ثم الكاف أقىص الحنيك ،uvular يجمعهام حيز واحد36: القاف اللهوي

.palatal ([ď] ـ ش [∫] ـ ض [ʤ] ج) :جرية37 األصوات الش -3 األصوات األسلية38: (ص [ş] ـ س [s] ـ ز [z])، وتسمى أصوات الصفري sibilants، وتندرج يف -4

.alveolar االنجليزية ضمن أصوات.alveolar وهي من أصول األسنان ([d] ـ د [t] ـ ت [ḑ] ط) :األصوات النطعية39 -5

.interdental وهي بني األسنانية ،([ð] ـ ذ [θ] ـ ث [đ] ظ) :األصوات اللثوية40 -6 .liquids وهي األصوات املتوسطة أو املوائع ([n]ـ ن [l] ـ ل [r]ر):لقية األصوات الذ -7

.(bilabial [m] ـ م [b] ب ،(labiodental [f] ف) :فهية األصوات الش -8

تنبـيـهـات:يترصف الفعل الثاليث املجرد Trilateral abstract verb عىل ستة أوزان رصفية، هي:

فعل [faʕala]، ومضارعه: يفعل [jaf ʕul]، مثل: (نرص ، ينرص). -1 فعل [faʕala]، ومضارعه: يفعل [jaf ʕil]، مثل: (رضب ، يرضب). -2

فعل [faʕala]، ومضارعه: يفعل [jaf ʕal]، مثل: (فتح ، يفتح). -3 فعل [faʕula]، ومضارعه: يفعل [jaf ʕul]، مثل: (كرم، يكرم). -4

فعل [faʕila]، ومضارعه: يفعل [jaf ʕal]، مثل: (علم، يعلم/فرح، يفرح). -5 فعل [faʕila]، ومضارعه:: يفعل [jaf ʕil]، مثل: (حسب، يحسب) -6

ويلحظ أن الفعل يف الزمن املايض يختلط فيه املضارع يف كل بابني من األبواب التالية:

(نرص) مع (كرم). (أ):

(فتح) مع (علم). (ب): (رضب) مع (حسب يحسب(، بكرس السني فيهام، مبعنى: ظن. (ج):

حيث تكون صيغة املضارع واحدة يف كل بابني منهام. وملا كان القاموس املحيط يكتب مايض الفعل املضعف للغائب- غالبا- فقـد آثـرت الباحثة أن تكتفي باألبواب الثالثة: (نرص) و(رضب) و(فتح) للمضعف. عىل أنها



نبهت يف الحاشية عىل صيغة الفعل الذي نص القاموس أو اللسان عىل ترصفه عىل باب آخر، أو نسبه إىل ضمري الرفع فظهر بابه الرصيف من صيغة املايض.

رمزت الباحثة يف جداول البحث لكل من األبواب الرصفية برقم خاص هو:)1( = نرص. )2( = رضب. )3( = فتح.

وفيام يأيت عرض للجداول التي تناولها البحث بالدراسةجدول رقم )1(

تقسيم املضعف الثالىث الصحيح مع أصوات األحياز الشفهية فاء له(كتب يف ملف landscape، عنوانه:

جدول رقم )2(تقسيم املضعف الثالىث الصحيح مع أصوات األحياز الشفهية عينا والما

تابع جدول رقم )2(تقسيم املضعف الثالىث الصحيح مع أصوات األحياز الشفهية عينا والما

جدول رقم )3(تقسيم املضعف الثالىث الصحيح مع أصوات األحياز الشفهية عينا والما

تابع جدول رقم )3(تقسيم املضعف الثالىث الصحيح مع أصوات األحياز الشفهية عينا والما

نتائج البحث:

من الجدول رقم )1( نلحظ السلوك التايل لألصوات الشفهية يف موقع فاء املضعف::)[m] م - [b] ب - [f] من األصوات الشفهية )ف (C1)فاء املضعف

:(C2/C3)عينا والما للمضعف pharyngeal أوال: مع األصوات الحلقية:([h - ʔ] )أ- مع صويت أقىص الحلق )أ - هـ

ال تقع األصوات الشفهية (ف [f] - ب [b] - م [m]) فاء للمضعف مع (الهمزة) [ʔ] أقىص 1. الحلقي املجهور.

ال يترصف (الفاء) [f] الشفهي املهموس، و(امليم) [m] الشفهي الخيشومي املتوسط املجهور- 2. فاء- مع (الهاء) [h] أقىص الحلقي املهموس إال عىل باب (فتح)، يف الفعلني (فه- يفه)،

(مه- ميه).

:[ħ - ʕ] )ب- مع صويت وسط الحلق االحتكاكيني )ع - حال يقع (الفاء) [f] االحتكايك املهموس و(امليم) [m] املتوسط الخيشومي فاء (C1) مع (العني) -1

[ʕ] وسط الحلقي املجهور.يترصف (الباء) [b] االنفجاري املجهور- فاء- مع (العني) [ʕ] املجهور عىل باب (رضب) يف -2

الفعل (بع- يبع)، ومع (الحاء) [ħ] املهموس عىل باب (فتح)، يف الفعل (بح- يبح).ال يقع (الفاء) [f] املهموس فاء للمضعف(C1) مع (العني) [ʕ] املجهور، ويترصف- فاء- مع -3

(الحاء) [ħ] املهموس عىل بايب (نرص) و(رضب)، يف الفعل (فح- يفح/يفح).ال يقع (امليم)[m] املتوسط الخيشومي املجهور فاء مع (العني) [ʕ] املجهور، ويترصف (امليم)- -4

فاء- مع (الحاء) [ħ] املهموس عىل األبواب (نرص، رضب، فتح) يف الفعل (مح).41



(1م (

رقل

دوج

Tabl

e 5.

1 له

ء فا

يةفه

ش ال

ازحي

األت

صواع أ

مىث

ثال ال

فضع

املم

سيتق

فاء املضعـف فاء الفعل )شفهي(

ـهـــ

الم و

ـلعــ

فــ ال

نيــ

عت

ـواصـ

ز أيــ

حــ

قــل

حــال

Ph

aryn

geal

اةوله

ك حن

ve

lar

فم ال

جرش

pala

tal

لةألس

ا

alve

olar

ارلغ

ع انط

alve

olar

ـةثــ

الل

nter

dent

al|

قةذال

الف

روح

liq

uids

انفت

شال

bila

bial

أهـ

عح

غخ

قك

جش

ضص

سز

طت

دظ

ثذ

رل

نف

بم

ʡh

ʢħ

γх

qk

ʤ∫

ḍṣ

sz

ţt

dɖ

θð

rl

nf

bm

اءف

f—

فه فه ي

—فح فح

يفح

ي

فغ فغ ي

فخ فخ ي

قف ق يف

كك فيف

فج فج ي

شش فيف

ضف

ضيف

صف

صيف

—فز فز

ي—

تف ت يف

فد فد ي

فد ي

ظف

ظ يف

ثف

ث يف

فذ فذي

فر فري

فل فلي

فل ي

نف ن يف

——

—

اءب

b—

به ه بي

بع بع ي

بح ح بي

بغ غ بي

بخ خ بي

قب ق يب ق يب

كك بيب

بج ج بي

شش بيب

ضب ض يب

صب ص يب

سب س يب

بز ز بي

طب

ط يب

تب ت يب ت يب

بد د بي

ظب

ظ يب

ثب

ث يب

ث يب

ذ بذ بي

بر يب يب يب

ل بل ببل يل ي بي

نب ب ي

——

—

يمم

m—

مه ه مي—

مح ح مي ميح ح مي

——

قم ق مي

كك ممي

مج ج ميش

ش ممي

ضم ض مي

صم ص مي

سم س مي س مي

مز ز مي ز مي

طم

ط مي

تم ت مي

مد د ميظ

مظ

ميث

مث

مي—

مر ر مي ر مي

ل مل ل مي مي

نم ن مي

——

—

ح(.فت

ب )لبا

ع راب

الطر

سوال

،)ب

رضب )

لباث

ثال ال

طرس

الص

صوخ

، رص(

)نب

لباص

ص خ

ينلثا

ر اسط

واليض،

ملال ا

فع ال

يه ف

بكت

د مو

عكل

ن م

ولاأل

ر سط

الة:

وظلح

م



جدول رقم (2)Table 5.2 تقسيم املضعف الثالىث الصحيح مع أصوات األحياز الشفهية عينا والما

فاء املضعف )ألفبائيا(

زمن املضعف

األصوات الشفهية عينا والما للمضعف )مع صفاتها(

الـمـيـمالـبــاءالـفـاء

انفجاري/مجهوراحتكايك/مهموس متوسط/مجهور/

خيشومي

الهمزةماض

مضارعأف

يـؤف/يـئـفأب

يـؤب/يـئـبأم

يـؤم

الباءماض

مضارع———

التاءماض

مضارعتـب—

يـتـبتـم

يـتـم

الثاءماض

مضارعثـب—

يـثـبثـم

يـثـم

الجيمماض

مضارعجـف

يجـف/يجـفجـب

يـجـبجـم

يـجـم/يـجـم

الحاءماض

مضارعحـف

يـحـف/يـحـفحـب

يحـب/يحـب )شاذ(حـم

يـحـم

الخاءماض

مضارعخـف

يـخـفخـب

يـخـبخـم

يـخـم/يـخـم

الدالماض

مضارعدف

يدف/يـدفدب

يـدبدم

يـدم/يـدم

الذالماض

مضارعذف

يـذفذب

يـذب/يـذبذم

يـذم/يـذم

الراءماض

مضارعرف

يرف/يـرفرب

يـربرم

يـرم/يـرم

الزاىماض

مضارعزف

يـزف/يـزفزب

يـزف/يـزفزم

يـزم

السنيماض

مضارعسـف

يـسـف/يـسـفسـب

يـسـبسـم

يـسـم

الشنيماض

مضارعشـف

يـشـفشـب

يـشـب/يـشـبشـم

يـشـم/يـشـم



تابع جدول رقم (2)Table 5.3 تقسيم املضعف الثالىث الصحيح مع أصوات األحياز الشفهية عينا والما

فاء املضعف )ألفبائيا(

زمن املضعف

األصوات الشفهية عينا والما للمضعف )مع صفاتها(

الـمـيـمالـبــاءالـفـاء


خيشومي

الصادماض

مضارعصـف

يـصـفصـب

يـصـبصـم

يـصـم/يـصـم

الضادماض

مضارعضـف

يـضـفضـب

يضب/يضب/يضبضـم

يـضـم

الطاءماض

مضارعطـف

يـطــفطـب

يطـب/يطـبطـم

يطـم/يطـم

الظاءماض

مضارعظــف

يـظــف——

العنيماض

مضارععـف

يـعـفعـب

يـعـبعـم

يـعـم

الغنيماض

مضارعغـب—

يـغـبغـم

يـغـم

الفاءماض

مضارع———

القافماض

مضارعقــف

يـقـفقـب

يـقــب/يـقـبقــم

يـقـم

الكافماض

مضارعكـف

يـكــفكـب

يـكــبكـم

يـكـم

الالمماض

مضارعلـف

يـلــفلـب

يـلـبلــم

يـلـم

امليمماض

مضارع———

النونماض

مضارعنـف

يـنـفنـب

يـنـبنـم

يـنــم/يـنـم

الهاءماض

مضارعهــف

يـهــفهــب

يـهـب/يـهــبهــم

يـهـم/يهــم



جدول رقم (3)Table 5.4 تقسيم املضعف الثالىث الصحيح مع أصوات األحياز الشفهية عينا والما

زمن املضعففاء املضعف حيز فاء املضعف

األصوات الشفهية عينا والما للمضعف

الـمـيـمالـبــاءالـفــاء


خيشومي

الحلق: )أقىص الحلق()وسط الحلق()أدىن الحلق(

ماضالهمـزةمضارع

أفيـؤف/يئـف

أبيـؤب/يـئـب

أميـؤم

ماضالهــاءمضارع

هـفيـهـف

هـبيهب/يهـب

هـميهم/يهـم

ماضالعيــنمضارع

عـفيـعـف

عـبيـعـب

عـميـعـم

ماضالحــاءمضارع

حـفيحـف/يحـف

حـبيحب/يحب

)شاذ(

حـميـحـم

ماضالغيــنمضارع

غـب—يـغـب

غـميغـم

ماضالخــاءمضارع

خـفيـخـف

خـبيـخـب

خـميـخم/يخـم

اللهاة والحنك األعىل

ماضالقـافمضارع

قـفيـقـف

قـبيـقـب/يقـب

قـميـقـم

ماضالكـافمضارع

كـفيـكـف

كـبيـكـب

كـميـكـم

شجر الفم

ماضالجيــممضارع

جـفيجـف/يجـف

جـبيـجـب

جـميجـم/يجـم

ماضالشـنيمضارع

شـفيـشـف

شـبيشـب/يشـب

شـميـشـم/يشـم

ماضالضـادمضارع

ضـفيـضـف

ضـبيضب/يضب/

يضـب

ضـميـضـم



تابع جدول رقم (3)Table 5.5 تقسيم املضعف الثالىث الصحيح مع أصوات األحياز الشفهية عينا والما

زمن ملضعففاء املضعف حيز فاء املضعف

األصوات الشفهية عينا والما للمضعف

[f امليـم [m]الباء [b]الفاء [


خيشومي

األسلة

ماضالصادمضارع

صـفيـصـف

صـبيـصـب

صـم/يـصـم يـصـم

ماضالسنيمضارع

سفيسـف/يسـف

سـب

يسـبسـم

يسـم

ماضالزاىمضارع

زفيزف/يزف

زب/يزب يزب

زميزم

نطع الغار

ماضالطاءمضارع

طـفيطـف

طـبيطـب/يطـب

طـميطـم/يطـم

ماضالتاءمضارع

تـب—يتـب

تـميتـم

ماضالدالمضارع

دفيدف/يدف

دبيدب

دميدم/يـدم

اللثة

ماضالظاءمضارع

ظـفيـظـف

——

ماضالثاءمضارع

ثـب—يـثـب

ثـميـثـم

ماضالذالمضارع

ذفيـذف

ذبيذب/يذب

ذميذم/يذم

ذولق اللسان

ماضالراءمضارع

رفيـرف/يرف

ربيـرب

رميـرم/يـرم

ماضالالممضارع

لـفيـلـف

لـبيـلـب

لـميـلـم

ماضالنونمضارع

نـفيـنـف

نـب

يـنـبنـم

يـنـم/يـنـم

الشفتان

———ماضالفـاء

———ماضالبـاء

———ماضامليـم



:[х - γ] (غ - خ) ج- مع صويت أدىن الحلق االحتكاكيني املستعليني [х - γ] (غ- خ) االنفجاري املجهور- فاء- مع صويت أدىن الحلق املستعليني [b] (الباء) ال يترصف 1.

إال عىل باب (نرص)، يف الفعلني (بغ، بخ)..[х - γ] (غ- خ) الخيشومي املتوسط املجهور فاء مع أدىن الحلقيني املستعليني [m] (م) ال يقع 2. يترصف (الفاء) [f] املهموس- فاء- مع (الغني) [γ] املجهور عىل باب (نرص) يف الفعل (فغ)، 3.

ومع (الخاء) [х] املهموس عىل باب (رضب) يف الفعل (فخ).

:)[γ] - [ʕ] - [ʔ]( )د- مع الحلقيات املجهورة)أ - ع - غ -[ʕ] ع -[ʔ] مع الحلقيات املجهورة (أ (C1) الخيشومي املتوسط املجهور فاء [m] (امليم) ال يقع -

غ)[γ]) عينا والما؛ التفاقها يف الجهر، واختالف امليم يف الخيشومية.

ثانيا: مع صويت اللهاة uvular ق [q] والحنك األعىل velar ك [k] عينا والما للمضعف: ال يترصف (الفاء) [f] االحتكايك املهموس و(امليم) [m] الخيشومي املتوسط املجهور- فاء- مع 1.

(ق- ك) إال عىل (نرص)، يف األفعال (فق- يفق)، (فك- يفك) و(مق- ميق)، (مك- ميك).ال يترصف (الباء) [b] االنفجاري املجهور- فاء- مع الحنيك االنفجاري املهموس (ك [k]) إال عىل 2.

باب (نرص)، يف الفعل (بك- يبك). يترصف (الباء) [b] االنفجاري املجهور- فاء- مع اللهوي االنفجاري املجهور (ق [q]) عىل بايب 3.

(نرص)و(رضب)، يف الفعل (بق- يبق/يبق).

:(C2/C3) عينا والما ([ď]ش[∫]- ض –[ʤ]ج)palatal ثالثا: مع األصوات الشجرية:)C1( فاء للمضعف plosive االنفجاري [b])أ- )الباء

ال يترصف (الباء) [b] املجهور- فاء- مع (الجيم) [ʤ] املجهور إال عىل باب (نرص)، يف الفعل 1. (بج- يبج).

ال يترصف (الباء) [b] االنفجاري املجهور- فاء- مع (ش) [∫] االحتكايك املهموس إال عىل (فتح) 2. يف الفعل (بش- يبش).

ال يترصف (الباء) [b] االنفجاري املجهور- فاء- مع (الضاد) [ď] االحتكايك املجهور املطبق إال 3. عىل باب (رضب) يف الفعل (بض- يبض).

:)C1( فاء للمضعف fricative االحتكايك [f])الفاء( ب - )[ď] ش [∫]- ض -[ʤ] االحتكايك املهموس- فاء- مع األصوات الشجرية (ج [f] (الفاء) ال يترصف ـ

إال عىل (نرص) يف األفعال (فج- يفج)، (فش- يفش)، (فض- يفض).

:)C1( فاء للمضعفnasal الخيشومي [m] )ج- )امليمال يترصف (امليم) [m] الخيشومي املجهور—فاء- مع األصوات الشجرية (ج [ʤ]- ش [∫]- ض ـ

[ď]( إال عىل باب (نرص)، يف األفعال (مج- ميج)، (مش- ميش)، (مض- ميض).

د- )الفاء( [f] و)الباء([b] و)امليم( [m] فاء للمضعف:ال تترصف األصوات الشفهية الثالثة (ف [f]- ب [b]- م [m])- فاء- مع (الجيم) [ʤ] الشجري ـ

املجهور املزجي إال عىل (نرص)، يف األفعال (فج- يفج)، (بج- يبج)، (مج- ميج).

:(C2/C3) عينا والما )[z]ز -[s]س –[ş] ص)alveolar رابعا: مع األصوات األسلية:)C1( املهموس فاء labiodental الشفهي األسناين [f])أ- )الفاء



ال يقع (الفاء) [f] االحتكايك املهموس- فاء- مع (السني) [s] االحتكايك املهموس. 1. ال يترصف (الفاء) [f] االحتكايك املهموس- فاء- مع االحتكاكيني: (الصاد) [ş] املهموس املطبق، 2.

و(الزاى) [z] املجهور املنفتح إال عىل (رضب)، يف الفعلني (فص- يفص)، (فز- يفز).

:)C1( املجهور، فاء bilabial الشفتاين [b] )ب- )الباءال يترصف (الباء) [b] االنفجاري املجهور املنفتح- فاء- مع االحتكاكيني املنفتحني: املهموس (س 1.

[s](، واملجهور(ز [z]) إال عىل باب (نرص)، يف الفعلني (بس- يبس)، (بز- يبز).ال يترصف (الباء) [b] االنفجاري املجهور املنفتح- فاء- مع (ص) [ş] االحتكايك املهموس املطبق 2.

إال عىل (رضب)، يف الفعل (بص- يبص).

:)C1( الشفهي الخيشومي املجهور، فاء [m] ج- امليميترصف (امليم) [m] الخيشومي املتوسط- فاء- مع األسليني املنفتحني (س [s]- ز[z]( عىل بايب 1.

(نرص) و(فتح)، يف الفعلني (مس42 - ميس/ميس) و(مز43 - ميز/ميز).ال يترصف (امليم) [m] الخيشومي- فاء- مع األسيل املطبق (ص) [ş] إال عىل (نرص) يف: 2.

(مص- ميص).

:)C1( فاء للمضعف [b] )الباء(و [f] )د- )الفاءال يترصف (الفاء[f] والباء) [b] املنفتحان غري الخيشوميني- فاء- مع (ص [ş]) املطبق إال عىل باب ـ

(رضب) يف الفعلني (فص- يفص)، (بص- يبص).

:(C2/C3) عينا والما )[d] د—[t] ت –[ţ] ط) alveolar خامسا: األصوات النطعية

:(C1) املهموس فاء labiodental الشفهي األسناين [f](الفاء) -أال يقع (الفاء)[f] االحتكايك املنفتح املهموس فاء مع (الطاء)[ţ] االنفجاري املطبق املجهور.44 1.

يترصف (الفاء)[f] االحتكايك املهموس- فاء- مع (الدال)[d] النطعي االنفجاري املجهور املنفتح 2. عىل بايب (نرص) و(رضب)، يف الفعل (فد- يفد/يفد).

ال يترصف (الفاء) [f] االحتكايك املهموس- فاء- مع (التاء) [t] االنفجاري املهموس إال عىل باب 3. (نرص)، يف الفعل (فت- يفت).

:)C1( املجهور، فاء bilabial الشفتاين [b] )ب- )الباءال يترصف (الباء) [b] االنفجاري املجهور- فاء- مع االنفجاريني املجهورين (ط [ţ]، د [d]) إال 1.

عىل باب (نرص)، يف الفعلني (بط- يبط)، (بد- يبد).يترصف (الباء) [b]- فاء- مع (التاء) [t] االنفجاري املهموس عىل بايب (نرص ورضب)،يف الفعل 2.

(بت- يبت/يبت).

:)C1( املجهور، فاء nasal الشفتاين الخيشومي [m] ج- امليمال يترصف (امليم) [m] املتوسط املجهور- فاء- مع األصوات النطعية )ط [ţ]– ت [t]—د [d]( إال ـ

عىل (نرص)، يف األفعال (مط- ميط) و(مت- ميت) و(مد- ميد).

:)C1( فاء [m] )امليم(و [b] )د- )الباءال يترصف املجهوران املنفتحان: (الباء) [b] االنفجاري، و(امليم) [m] املتوسط- فاء- مع (الطاء) ـ

[ţ] االنفجاري املطبق املجهور إال عىل (نرص)، يف الفعلني (بط – يبط) و(مط- ميط).



:(C2/C3) عينا والما للمضعف )[ð]ذ –[θ]ث –[đ] ظ)interdental سادسا: مع األصوات اللثوية:)C1( املهموس فاء labiodental الشفهي األسناين [f])أ- )الفاء

ال يترصف (الفاء)[f] االحتكايك املهموس املنفتح- فاء- مع (الظاء) [đ] االحتكايك املجهور املطبق 1. إال عىل باب (فتح)، يف الفعل (فظ- يفظ).

ال يترصف (الفاء) االحتكايك املهموس املنفتح- فاء- مع االحتكاكيني املنفتحني: (ث[θ]- ذ[ð]) إال 2. عىل (نرص)، يف الفعلني (فث- يفث) و(فذ- يفذ).

:)C1( املجهور، فاء bilabial الشفتاين [b] )ب- )الباءال يترصف (الباء) [b] االنفجاري املجهور- فاء- مع االحتكاكيني املجهورين (ظ [đ]- ذ[ð]) إال 3.

عىل (نرص)، يف الفعلني (بظ- يبظ) و(بذ- يبذ).يترصف (الباء) [b] االنفجاري املجهور- فاء- مع االحتكايك املهموس (ث) [θ] عىل بايب (نرص) 4.

و(رضب)، يف الفعل (بث- يبث/يبث).

:)C1( املجهور، فاء nasal الخيشومي bilabial الشفتاين [m] ج- امليمال يقع (امليم) [m] الخيشومي املجهور املتوسط فاء مع (الذال)[ð] االحتكايك املجهور املنفتح. 1. ال يترصف (امليم) الخيشومي املتوسط- فاء- مع (الظاء) [đ] االحتكايك املجهور املطبق إال عىل 2.

باب (نرص)، يف الفعل (مظ- ميظ)..3 ال يترصف (امليم) الخيشومي املتوسط- فاء- مع (الثاء) [θ] املنفتح االحتكايك املهموس إال عىل

(نرص)، يف الفعل (مث- ميث).

:)C1( فاء [m] )امليم(و [b] )الباء(و [f] )د- )الفاءال يترصف الشفهيان غري الخيشوميني (ف [f]- ب [b]) مع (ذ) [ð] املجهور إال عىل (نرص) يف 1.

الفعلني (فذ- يفذ) و(بذ- يبذ)..2 ال يترصف (الفاء [f] وامليم [m])- فاء- مع (الثاء) [θ] املهموس إال عىل (نرص)، يف الفعلني

(فث- يفث) و(مث- ميث).ال يترصف (الباء) [b] و(امليم) [m] املجهوران- فاء- مع (الظاء) [đ] املجهور املطبق إال عىل 3.

(نرص) يف الفعلني (بظ، مظ).

:(C2/C3) عينا والما ([n]ن -[l]ل -[r]ر) liquids سابعا: مع األصوات الذلقية:)C1( املهموس فاء labiodental الشفهي األسناين [f])أ- )الفاء

ال يترصف (الفاء) [f] االحتكايك املهموس- فاء- مع (الراء) [r] املجهور املكرر املتوسط إال عىل 1. (رضب) يف الفعل (فر- يفر).

ال يترصف (الفاء) [f]- فاء- مع (النون [n]) الخيشومي املجهور إال عىل باب (نرص) يف الفعل 2. (فن- يفن).

يترصف (الفاء) [f] االحتكايك املهموس- فاء- مع (الالم) [l] الجانبي املجهور املتوسط عىل بايب 3. (نرص) و(رضب)، يف الفعل (فل- يفل/يفل).

:)C1( املجهور، فاء bilabial الشفتاين [b] )ب- )الباءيترصف (الباء) [b]- فاء- مع الذلقيني املتوسطني (ر- ل) عىل األبواب الثالثة (نرص- رضب 1.

) و(بل- يبل/يبل/يبل). وفتح)، يف الفعلني (بر- يب/يب/يبال يترصف (الباء) [b] االنفجاري املجهور- فاء- مع (النون) [n] الخيشومي املتوسط إال عىل 2.

.( (رضب) يف الفعل (بن- يب



:)C1( املجهور، فاء nasal الخيشومي bilabial الشفتاين [m] ج- امليمال يترصف (امليم) [m] املتوسط املجهور- فاء- مع (النون) [n] الخيشومي املتوسط املجهور إال 1.

عىل باب (نرص)، يف الفعل (من- مين).يترصف (امليم) [m] الخيشومي املجهور- فاء- مع املجهورين غري الخيشوميني (ر[r]- ل[l]) عىل 2.

بايب (نرص) و(فتح)، يف الفعلني (مر- مير/مير) و(مل - ميل/ميل).

ثامنا: مع األصوات الشفهية (الفاء[f]و(الباء)[b] و(امليم) [m]) عينا والما: ال تقع األصوات الشفهية (ف [f]- ب [b] - م [m]( فاء للمضعف مع أحد األصوات الشفهية.45 ـ

ومن الجدولني (2)، (3) نلحظ االتجاهات التالية لألصوات الشفهية، يف موقع عني الفعل والمه::)[m] م -[b] ب -[f] من األصوات الشفهية )ف (C2/C3)عني املضعف والمه

:(C1) فاء للمضعف pharyngeal أوال: مع األصوات الحلقيةأ- مع صويت أقىص الحلق )أ - هـ( [h - ʔ]( فاء:

ال يترصف (الهمزة [ʔ]) املجهور- فاء- مع (امليم [m]) الخيشومي املتوسط املجهور إال عىل باب 1. (نرص) يف الفعل (أم- يؤم).

يترصف (الهمزة [ʔ])- فاء- مع الشفهيني غري الخيشوميني:(الباء [b]) االنفجاري املجهور 2. و(الفاء [f]) االحتكايك املهموس عىل بايب (نرص ورضب) يف الفعلني (أب- يؤب/يئب)

و(أف- يؤف/يئف).ال يترصف (الهاء [h]) االحتكايك املهموس- فاء- مع (الفاء [f]) االحتكايك املهموس إال عىل باب 3.

(رضب)، يف الفعل (هف- يهف).يترصف (الهاء [h]) االحتكايك املهموس- فاء- مع الشفهيني املجهورين: (الباء [b]) االنفجاري 4.

و(امليم [m]) املتوسط عىل بايب (نرص ورضب) يف الفعلني(هب- يهب/يهب) و(هم- يهم/يهم(.

ب- مع صويت وسط الحلق االحتكاكيني )ع—ح( [ħ - ʕ] فاء:ال يترصف (العني [ʕ]) املجهور- فاء- مع (الفاء [f]) االحتكايك املهموس إال عىل باب (رضب) يف 1.

الفعل (عف- يعف).يترصف (الحاء [ħ]) املهموس- فاء- مع (الفاء [f]) االحتكايك املهموس عىل بايب (نرص) 2.

و(رضب) يف الفعل (حف- يحف/يحف).ال يترصف (العني [ʕ]) املجهور- فاء- مع الشفهيني املجهورين: (الباء [b]) االنفجاري و(امليم 3.

[m]) املتوسط إال عىل باب (نرص) يف الفعلني (عب- يعب) و(عم- يعم).ال يترصف (الحاء [ħ]) املهموس- فاء- مع الشفهيني املجهورين: (الباء [b]) االنفجاري و(امليم 4.

[m]) املتوسط الخيشومي إال عىل باب (نرص)، يف الفعلني (حب46 - يحب) و(حم- يحم).

ج- مع صويت أدىن الحلق االحتكاكيني املستعليني (غ - خ)[γ - х] فاء:ال يقع (الغني [γ]) االحتكايك املجهور فاء مع (الفاء [f]) االحتكايك املهموس. 1.

.2 يترصف (الخاء [х]) االحتكايك املهموس- فاء- مع (الفاء [f]) االحتكايك املهموس عىل باب (رضب) منفردا، يف الفعل (خف- يخف).

ال يترصف (الخاء [х]) االحتكايك املهموس- فاء- مع (الباء[b])االنفجاري املجهور إال عىل باب 3. (نرص)، يف الفعل (خب- يخب).

يترصف (الخاء [х]) االحتكايك املهموس- فاء- مع (امليم [m]) الخيشومي املتوسط املجهور عىل 4. بايب (نرص) و(رضب)، يف الفعل (خم- يخم/يخم).



د- مع الحلقيات املجهورة )أ - ع - غ( [γ - ʕ - ʔ] فاء:ال تترصف الحلقيات املجهورة (أ- ع- غ) [γ - ʕ - ʔ]—فاء- مع (امليم [m]) الخيشومي املتوسط ـ

املجهور إال عىل باب (نرص) يف األفعال (أم- يؤم)، (عم- يعم)، (غم- يغم).

هـ مع الحلقيات املهموسة )هـ - ح - خ([х - ħ - h] فاء:تترصف الحلقيات االحتكاكية املهموسة (هـ[h]- ح [ħ]- خ [х](- فاء- مع (الفاء [f]( االحتكايك ـ

املهموس عادة عىل (رضب)، يف األفعال (هف- يهف)، (حف47 - يحف)، (خف- يخف).

ثانيا: مع صويت اللهاة uvular ق [q] والحنك األعىل velar ك [k] فاء للمضعف: يترصف صوتا اللهاة والحنك األعىل (ق [q]- ك [k])- فاء- مع األصوات الشفهية الثالثة (ف 1.

[f]- ب [b]- م [m]) عىل (نرص)، يف األفعال (قف- يقف)،(قب- يقب)، (قم- يقم) و(كف- يكف)، (كب- يكب)، (كم- يكم).

ال يترصف (الكاف [k]) االنفجاري املهموس- فاء- مع األصوات الشفهية (ف [f]- ب [b]- م 2. [m]) إال عىل (نرص)، يف األفعال (كف- يكف)، (كب- يكب)، (كم- يكم).

يترصف (القاف [q]) االنفجاري املجهور- فاء- مع (الباء [b]) االنفجاري املجهور عىل بايب 3. (نرص) و(رضب)، يف الفعل (قب- يقب/يقب).

ثالثا: مع األصوات الشجرية palatal (ج [ʤ]– ش[∫]- ض [ď]( فاء للمضعف: أ- الجيم [ʤ] الشجري االنفجاري املجهور فاء:

يترصف (الجيم) [ʤ] االنفجاري املجهور- فاء- مع (الفاء) [f] االحتكايك املهموس عىل بايب 1. (رضب) و(فتح)، يف الفعل (جف- يجف/يجف).

ال يترصف (الجيم) [ʤ] االنفجاري املجهور- فاء- مع (الباء) [b] االنفجاري املجهور إال عىل 2. (نرص)، يف الفعل (جب- يجب).

يترصف (الجيم) [ʤ] االنفجاري املجهور- فاء- مع (امليم) [m] الخيشومي املتوسط املجهور 3. عىل بايب (نرص) و(رضب)، يف الفعل (جم- يجم/يجم).

ب- الشني [∫] االحتكايك املهموس املتفيش فاء.ال يترصف (الشني) [∫] االحتكايك املهموس- فاء- مع (الفاء) [f] االحتكايك املهموس إال عىل باب 1.

(رضب)، يف الفعل (شف- يشف).يترصف (الشني) [∫] االحتكايك املهموس- فاء- مع (الباء) [b] االنفجاري املجهور عىل بايب 2.

(نرص) و(رضب)، يف الفعل (شب- يشب/يشب).يترصف (الشني) [∫] االحتكايك املهموس املتفيش- فاء- مع (امليم) [m] الخيشومي املتوسط 3.

املجهور عىل بايب (نرص) و(فتح)، يف الفعل (شم- يشم/يشم).

ج- الضاد [ď] االحتكايك املجهور املطبق فاء:ال يترصف (الضاد) [ď] االحتكايك املجهور املطبق- فاء- مع (الفاء) [f] االحتكايك املهموس، إال 1.

عىل (نرص)، يف الفعل (ضف- يضف).يترصف (الضاد)[ď] االحتكايك املجهور املطبق- فاء- مع (الباء)[b] االنفجاري املجهور عىل 2.

األبواب (نرص)و(رضب)و(فتح)، يف الفعل (ضب- يضب/يضب/يضب).ال يترصف (الضاد) [ď] االحتكايك املجهور املطبق- فاء- مع (امليم) [m] املتوسط املجهور إال عىل 3.

(نرص)، يف الفعل (ضم- يضم).يترصف الشجريان (ش [∫]- ض [ď])– فاء- مع (الباء) [b] الشفهي االنفجاري املجهور عىل بايب 4.

(نرص) و(رضب)، يف الفعلني (شب، ضب).



رابعا: مع األصوات األسلية alveolarاالحتكاكية ficatives(ص [ş]– س [s]- ز [z]( فاء: أ- الصاد [ş] االحتكايك املهموس املطبق فاء:

ال يترصف (الصاد [ş]) االحتكايك املهموس املطبق- فاء- مع الشفهيني (ف [f] – ب [b]) إال 1. عىل (نرص)، يف الفعلني (صف- يصف)، (صب- يصب).

يترصف (الصاد) [ş] االحتكايك املهموس املطبق- فاء- مع الشفهي الخيشومي املتوسط (امليم) 2. [m] عىل بايب (نرص) و(فتح)، يف الفعل (صم- يصم/يصم).

ب- السني [s] االحتكايك املهموس املنفتح فاء:يترصف (السني) [s] االحتكايك املهموس املنفتح- فاء- مع (الفاء)[f] االحتكايك املهموس املنفتح 1.

عىل بايب (نرص) و(فتح)، يف الفعل (سف- يسف/يسف).ال يترصف (السني) [s] االحتكايك املهموس- فاء- مع املجهورين: (الباء) االنفجاري [b] و(امليم) 2.

[m] املتوسط إال عىل (نرص)، يف الفعلني (سب- يسب، سم- يسم).

ج- الزاي [z] االحتكايك املجهور املنفتح فاء:ال يترصف (الزاي)[z] االحتكايك املجهور املنفتح- فاء- مع (امليم)[m] املتوسط املجهور إال عىل 1.

(نرص)، يف الفعل (زم- يزم).يترصف (الزاي) [z] االحتكايك املجهور املنفتح- فاء- مع (الباء) [b] االنفجاري املجهور املنفتح 2.

عىل بايب (نرص) و(فتح)، يف الفعل (زب- يزب/يزب).يترصف (الزاي)[z] االحتكايك املجهور املنفتح- فاء- مع (الفاء)[f] االحتكايك املهموس املنفتح 3.

عىل بايب (نرص) و(رضب)، يف الفعل (زف- يزف/يزف).

د- األسليان املهموسان )ص [ş]—س [s]( فاء:ال يترصف (ص [ş]- س [s]) االحتكاكيان املهموسان- فاء- مع (الباء) [b] االنفجاري املجهور إال ـ

عىل (نرص)، يف الفعلني (صب- يصب، سب- يسب).

هـ األسليان املنفتحان )س [s]- ز [z]( فاء:ال يترصف االحتكاكيان املنفتحان (س [s]- ز [z](—فاء- مع (امليم) [m] املتوسط املنفتح إال عىل ـ

(نرص)، يف الفعلني (سم- يسم، زم- يزم).

خامسا: مع األصوات النطعية alveolar (ط[ţ]- ت[t]- د [d]( فاء للمضعف: أ- الطاء [ţ] االنفجاري املجهور48 املطبق فاء:

ال يترصف (الطاء)[ţ] االنفجاري املجهور املطبق- فاء- مع (الفاء)[f] االحتكايك املهموس املنفتح 1. إال عىل (نرص)، يف الفعل (طف- يطف(.

يترصف (الطاء)[ţ] االنفجاري املجهور املطبق- فاء- مع الشفهيني املجهورين املنفتحني:(الباء) 2. [b] االنفجاري و(امليم)[m] املتوسط عىل بايب (نرص ورضب)، يف الفعلني (طب- يطـب/يطـب ،

طم- يطـم/يطـم).

ب- التاء [t] االنفجاري املهموس املنفتح فاء: ال يقع (التاء)[t] االنفجاري املهموس املنفتح فاء مع (الفاء)[f] االحتكايك املهموس املنفتح. 1.

ال يترصف (التاء)[t] االنفجاري املهموس- فاء- مع (الباء)[b] االنفجاري املجهور إال عىل (نرص)، 2. يف الفعل (تب- يـتـب).

ال يترصف (التاء)[t] االنفجاري املهموس- فاء- مع (امليم)[m] املتوسط املجهور الخيشـومي إال 3. عىل (رضب)، يف الفعل (تم- يـتـم).



ج- الدال [d] االنفجاري املجهور املنفتح فاء: [m] (امليم) االحتكايك املهموس ومع [f](الفاء) االنفجاري املجهور- فاء- مع [d](الدال) يترصف 1.

املتوسط املجهور عىل بايب (نرص ورضب)، يف الفعلني (دف- يدف/يـدف) و(دم- يـدم/يـدم).ال يترصف (الدال)[d] االنفجاري املجهور- فاء- مع (الباء)[b] االنفجاري املجهور إال عىل 2.

(رضب)، يف الفعل (دب- يـدب).

د- االنفجاريان املجهوران ط [ţ]- د [d] فاء:يترصف االنفجاريان املجهوران (ط [ţ]- د [d](- فاء- مع (الباء) [b] االنفجاري املجهور عىل 1.

(رضب) منفردا أو مشرتكا، يف الفعلني (طب-يطـب/يطـب ، دب- يـدب(.يترصف االنفجاريان املجهوران (ط[ţ]- د[d])- فاء- مع (امليم)[m] املتوسط املجهور عىل بايب 2.

(نرص) و(رضب)، يف الفعلني (طم- يطـم/يطـم ، دم- يـدم/يـدم).يترصف االنفجاريان املجهوران (ط[ţ]- د[d])- فاء- مع (ف)[f] االحتكايك املهموس عىل (نرص) 3.

منفردا أو مشرتكا، يف الفعلني (طف- يـطــف ، دف- يدف/يـدف).

سادسا: مع األصوات اللثوية interdental (ظ [đ]- ث [θ]– ذ [ð]( فاء للمضعف: أ- الظاء [đ] االحتكايك املجهور املطبق فاء:

[m](امليم)االنفجاري و [b](الباء) :املجهور فاء مع الشفهيني املجهورين [đ]ال يقع الظاء 1. املتوسط.

يترصف (الظاء)[đ] االحتكايك املجهور املطبق- فاء- مع (الفاء)[f] االحتكايك املهموس املنفتح 2. عىل باب (نرص) منفردا، يف الفعل (ظف- يظف).

ب- الثاء [θ] االحتكايك املهموس املنفتح فاء:ال يقع (الثاء)[θ] االحتكايك املهموس املنفتح فاء، مع (الفاء)[f] االحتكايك املهموس املنفتح. 1.

[m](امليم)االنفجاري و [b](الباء):املهموس- فاء- مع الشفهيني املجهورين [θ](الثاء) يترصف 2. املتوسط عىل باب (نرص) منفردا، يف الفعلني (ثب- يثب، ثم- يثم).

ج- الذال [ð] االحتكايك املجهور املنفتح فاء:يترصف (الذال)[ð] االحتكايك املجهور املنفتح- فاء- مع (الفاء)[f] االحتكايك املهموس املنفتح 1.

عىل باب (رضب) منفردا، يف الفعل (ذف- يـذف). [b](الباء) :االحتكايك املجهور املنفتح- فاء- مع الشفهيني املجهورين [ð](الذال) يترصف 2.

االنفجاري و(امليم)[m] املتوسط عىل بايب (نرص) و(رضب)، يف الفعلني (ذب- يـذب/يـذب ، ذم- يـذم/يـذم).

يترصف (الذال)[ð] اللثوي املجهور- فاء- مع األصوات الشفهية (ف[f]- ب[b] – م[m]) عىل 3. باب (رضب) دامئا، يف األفعال (ذف- يـذف، ذب- يـذب/يـذب، ذم- يـذم/يـذم).

د- اللثويان املنفتحان )ث [θ]—ذ [ð]( فاء:يترصف االحتكاكيان املنفتحان (ث [θ]- ذ [ð](- فاء- مع الشفهيني املنفتحني غري االحتكاكيني: ـ

(الباء)[b] االنفجاري و(امليم)[m] املتوسط عىل باب (نرص) منفردا أو مشرتكا، يف األفعال (ثب- يـثـب، ثم- يـثـم، ذب- يـذب/يـذب ، ذم- يـذم/يـذم).

سابعا: مع األصوات الذلقية liquids(ر[r]– ل[l]- ن[n]( املتوسطة فاء للمضعف: أ- الراء [r] املجهور املكرر فاء:

ال يترصف (الراء)[r] املتوسط املجهور املكرر- فاء- مع (الباء)[b] االنفجاري املجهور إال عىل 1. (نرص) يف الفعل (رب- يـرب).



يترصف (الراء)[r] املتوسط املجهور- فاء- مع (الفاء)[f] االحتكايك املهموس املنفتح، ومع (امليم) 2. [m] املتوسط املجهور عىل بايب (نرص) و(رضب)، يف الفعلني (رف- يرف/يـرف ، رم- يـرم/يـرم).

ب- الالم [l] املجهور الجانبي فاء:ال يترصف (الالم)[l] املجهور الجانبي- فاء- مع (الفاء)[f] االحتكايك املهموس إال عىل باب 1.

(نرص)، يف الفعل (لف- يلف).ال يترصف (الالم)[l] املجهور الجانبي- فاء- مع (الباء)[b] االنفجاري املجهور إال عىل باب 2.

- يلب). (نرص)، يف الفعل (لبال يترصف (الالم)[l] املجهور الجانبي- فاء- مع اامليم املجهور الخيشومي [m]( إال عىل باب 3.

(نرص)، يف الفعل (مل- يلم).

ج- النون [n] املجهور الخيشومي فاء:يترصف (النون)[n] املتوسط املجهور الخيشومي- فاء- مع (الفاء)[f] االحتكايك املهموس عىل 1.

باب (نرص) منفردا، يف الفعل (نف- ينف).يترصف (النون)[n] املتوسط املجهور الخيشومي- فاء- مع (الباء)[b] الشفهي االنفجاري 2.

املجهور عىل باب (رضب) منفردا، يف الفعل (نب- ينب).يترصف (النون)[n] املتوسط املجهور الخيشومي- فاء- مع (امليم)[m] املتوسط املجهور 3.

الخيشومي عىل بايب (نرص) و(رضب)، يف الفعل (نم- ينم/ينم).

د- الذلقيان غري الخيشوميني: الراء املكرر [r] والالم الجانبي [l] فاء:ال يترصف املجهوران: (الراء) املكرر[r] ، و(الالم) [l] الجانبي- فاء- مع (الباء)[b] االنفجاري ـ

املجهور إال عىل باب (نرص)، يف الفعلني (رب- يرب، لب- يلب).

ثامنا: مع األصوات الشفهية فاء للمضعف: سبقت اإلشارة إىل تنافر األصوات الشفهية مع بعضها.

بهذا يكون البحث قد حقق أهدافه باإلجابة عن التساؤالت الواردة يف مطلعه:فقد تبني أثر حيز كل من صويت الفعل املضعف يف ورود الفعل عىل باب رصيف بعينه. ـ

كام اتضح أن أحياز األصوات ومخارجها كانت عامال حاكام يف اختيار الباب الرصيف عىل لسان العرب ـ القدامى.

وعىل مستوى حيز الشفتني رأينا أن االتحاد ىف مخرج أصوات الحيز هو العامل الحاكم يف إيثار الفعل ـ بابا رصفيا بعينه.

اخلامتة

من تحليل النتائج السابقة أمكن تلمس بعض القواعد التي تحكم ترصف الفعل الثاليث املضعف حني يكون أحد صوتيه من حيز الشفتني عىل النحو اآليت:

القواعد الحاكمة للسلوك الرصيف للفعل الثاليث املضعف املجردالذي يكون أحد صوتيه من الشفتني:

:)[m] م -[b]ب -[f]( من األصوات الشفهية )فC1( فاء املضعف • :)C2/C3( عينا والما [х خ- γ غ-ħ ح-ʕ ع-h هـ-ʔ أ] pharyngeal مع األصوات الحلقية

ال يقع )ف([f] االحتكايك املهموس فاء مع أصوات الحلق إال مع االحتكاكية منها: فيترصف- فاء- 1. مع االحتكاكيني املهموسني من أقىص الحلق ووسطه: (هـ [h]– ح [ħ](، يف الفعلني: (فه- يفه)،



(فح- يفح/يفح)، وكذلك مع االحتكاكيني املستعليني من أدىن الحلق (غ [γ]- خ [х])، يف الفعلني: (فغ- يفغ)، (فخ- يفخ).

حني يقع )الفاء([f] االحتكايك املهموس- فاء- مع صويت أدىن الحلق االحتكاكيني (غ [γ]- خ 2. [х](: يترصف مع الغني [γ] املجهور عىل )نرص(، يف الفعل املايض (فغ)، ومضارعه: (يفغ). ويترصف مع )الخاء( [х]- الذي يتفق معه يف الهمس- عىل )رضب(، يف الفعل (فخ- يفخ).

عند اختالف الشفهي- فاء- مع أقىص الحلقي يف الخيشومية والتوسط والجهر ال يترصفان إال 3. [h](الهاء) املتوسط املجهور الخيشومي- فاء- مع ([m](امليم) فال يترصف :)عىل باب )فتح

االحتكايك املهموس إال عىل (فتح)، يف الفعل (مه—ميه).عند اختالف الشفهي- فاء- مع أصوات أقىص الحلق وأدناه يف االنفجار ال يترصف إال عىل باب 4. )نرص(: فال يترصف (الباء)[b] االنفجاري املجهور- فاء- مع (الهاء)[h] االحتكايك املهموس إال

عىل (نرص)، يف الفعل (به—يبه)، وال يترصف (الباء)[b]- فاء- مع صويت أدىن الحلق االحتكاكيني (غ [γ]- خ [х]) إال عىل (نرص)، يف الفعلني (بغ—يبغ) و(بخ—يبخ).

يتنافر الشفهي الخيشومي- فاء- مع أدىن الحلقيني املستعليني (غ [γ]- خ [х]): فال يقع (م( 5. .[х] والخاء [γ] فاء لفعل مضعف مع كل من الغني -[b](الباء) وهو من مخرج -[m]

عند اختالف الشفهي- فاء- مع أقىص الحلقي يف االنفجار والجهر ال يترصفان إال عىل باب )نرص(: 6. ،([h]هـ) االنفجاري املجهور- فاء- مع أقىص الحلقي االحتكايك املهموس [b](الباء) فال يترصف

إال عىل (نرص)، يف الفعل (به- يبه).عند اختالف الشفهي- فاء- مع وسط الحلقي يف االنفجار، واتفاقهام يف الجهر ال يترصفان إال عىل 7.

باب )رضب(: فال يترصف (الباء)[b] االنفجاري املجهور- فاء- مع (العني)[ʕ] وسط الحلقي املتوسط املجهور إال عىل (رضب)، يف الفعل (بع—يبع).

عند اختالف الشفهي- فاء- مع وسط الحلقي يف االنفجار والجهر ال يترصفان إال عىل )فتح(: فال 8. يترصف (الباء)[b] املجهور- فاء- مع (الحاء)[ħ] وسط الحلقي االحتكايك املهموس إال عىل باب

—يبح. (فتح)، يف الفعل (بحال يترصف )امليم([m] الخيشومي املتوسط املجهور- فاء- عىل باب )رضب( مع األصوات 9.

الصامتة إال مع )الحاء([ħ] وسط الحلقي االحتكايك املهموس، يف الفعل (مح—ميح).ال يقع )امليم([m] املتوسط املجهور الخيشومي فاء مع أصوات الحلق إال مع االحتكاكيني 10.

املهموسني املستفلني (هـ [h]- ح [ħ])، يف الفعلني: (مه– ميه) و(مح- ميح/ميح/ميح). :[х خ - γ غ -ħ ح -ʕ ع -h هـ -ʔ أ] من األصوات الحلقية (C1)فاء املضعف •

:)C2/C3(عينا والما )[m] م -[b]ب -[f]مع األصوات الشفهية )فيتنافر أدىن الحلقي—فاء- مع الشفهي عند اتفاقهام يف االحتكاك، واختالفهام يف الجهر: فال يقع 1.

(الغني)[γ] االحتكايك املجهور فاء للمضعف مع (الفاء)[f] االحتكايك املهموس.عند اتفاق أدىن الحلقي—فاء- مع الشفهي يف االحتكاك والهمس ال يترصفان إال عىل باب 2.

)رضب(: فال يترصف (الخاء) [х] االحتكايك املهموس- فاء- مع (الفاء) [f] االحتكايك املهموس - يخف). إال عىل (رضب)، يف الفعل (خف

عند اختالف أدىن الحلقي- فاء- مع الشفهي يف االحتكاك، واتفاقهام يف الجهر ال يترصفان إال عىل 3. باب )رضب(: فال يترصف (الغني)[γ] االحتكايك املجهور- فاء- مع (الباء)[b] االنفجاري املجهور

- يغب). إال عىل باب (رضب)، يف الفعل (غبعند اختالف أدىن الحلقي- فاء- مع الشفهي يف االحتكاك والجهر ال يترصفان إال عىل )نرص(: 4.

فال يترصف (الخاء)[х] االحتكايك املهموس- فاء- مع (الباء)[b] االنفجاري املجهور إال عىل باب - يخب). (نرص) يف الفعل (خب

عند اختالف أدىن الحلقي- فاء- مع الشفهي يف االحتكاك والخيشومية، واتفاقهام يف الجهر 5. [m](امليم) االحتكايك املجهور- فاء- مع [γ](الغني) ال يترصفان إال عىل )نرص(: فال يترصف

- يغم). الشفهي الخيشومي املتوسط املجهور- من مخرج (الباء)- إال عىل (نرص)، يف الفعل (غم



:)[m] م -[b]ب -[f]( من األصوات الشفهية )فC1(فاء املضعف • :)C2/C3( عينا والما [k] ك velar والحنك األعىل [q] قuvular مع صويت اللهاة

ال تترصف األصوات الشفهية (ف[f]- ب[b]- م[m](- فاء- مع الكاف [k] الحنيك االنفجاري 1. املهموس إال عىل )نرص(، يف األفعال (فك- يفك) و(بك- يبك) و(مك- ميك).

ال يترصف الفاء[f] الشفهي األسناين االحتكايك املهموس، وامليم[m] الشفهي الخيشومي املتوسط 2. املجهور- فاء- مع القاف [q] إال عىل باب )نرص(، يف الفعلني: (فق- يفق) و(مق- ميق).

:)[k] ك - [q] ( من اللهاة والحنك األعىل )قC1(فاء املضعف • :)C2/C3( عينا والما )[m] م -[b]ب -[f]مع األصوات الشفهية )ف

-[b] ب -[f] الحنيك االنفجاري املهموس- فاء- مع األصوات الشفهية (ف [k]ال يترصف الكاف 1. م [m](إال عىل باب )نرص(، يف األفعال: (كف- يكف) و(كب- يكب) و(كم- يكم).

ال يترصف القاف[q] اللهوي االنفجاري املجهور- فاء- مع الفاء[f] الشفهي األسناين االحتكايك 2. املهموس، وامليم [m] الشفهي الخيشومي املتوسط املجهور إال عىل باب )نرص(، يف الفعلني:

(قف- يقف) و(قم- يقم).:)[m] م -[b] ( من األصوات الشفهية )ف- بC1(فاء املضعف •

:)C2/C3( عينا والما )[ď] ش[∫]- ض -[ʤ]ج( palatal مع األصوات الشجريةال تترصف الشفهيات (ف [f]- ب [b]- م [m](- فاء- مع )الجيم( [ʤ] الشجري املجهور إال 1.

عىل باب )نرص(، يف األفعال:(فج- يفج) و(بج- يبج) و(مج- ميج).ال يترصف )الفاء([f] االحتكايك املهموس- فاء- مع الشجريات (ج [ʤ]- ش [∫]- ض [ď]) إال 2.

عىل باب )نرص(، يف األفعال: (فج- يفج) و(فش- يفش)، (فض- يفض). ال يترصف )امليم([m] املتوسط الخيشومي املجهور- فاء- مع الشجريات (ج [ʤ]- ش [∫]- ض 3.

[ď]) إال عىل باب )نرص(، يف األفعال: (مج- ميج) و(مش- ميش) و(مض- ميض).ال يترصف )الباء([b] الشفهي االنفجاري املجهور- فاء- مع )الجيم([ʤ] الشجري املزجي 4.

املجهور إال عىل )نرص(، يف الفعل (بج- يبج)..5 ال يترصف )الباء([b] الشفهي االنفجاري املجهور- فاء- مع )الشني([∫] االحتكايك املهموس

املتفيش إال عىل باب )فتح(، يف الفعل (بش- يبش).ال يترصف )الباء([b] االنفجاري املجهور- فاء- مع )الضاد([ď] االحتكايك املجهور املطبق إال عىل 6.

باب )رضب(، يف الفعل (بض- يبض).:)[ď]ش [∫]- ض -[ʤ]ج( palatal من األصوات الشجرية )C1(فاء املضعف •

:)C2/C3( عينا والما )[m] م -[b]ب -[f]مع األصوات الشفهية )فال يترصف )الجيم([ʤ] الشجري املزجي املجهور- فاء- مع )الباء([b] االنفجاري املجهور إال 1.

عىل باب )نرص(، يف الفعل (جب- يجب).ال يترصف )الشني( [∫] االحتكايك املهموس املتفيش- فاء- مع )الفاء( [f] االحتكايك املهموس إال 2.

عىل باب )رضب(، يف الفعل (شف- يشف).ال يترصف )الضاد( [ď] االحتكايك املجهور املطبق- فاء- مع )الفاء( [f] االحتكايك املهموس 3.

املنفتح إال عىل باب )نرص(، يف الفعل (ضف- يضف).ال يترصف )الضاد( [ď] االحتكايك املجهور املطبق- فاء- مع )امليم( [m] املتوسط الخيشومي 4.

- يضم). املجهور املنفتح إال عىل باب )نرص(، يف الفعل (ضم:)[m] م -[b]ب -[f]( من األصوات الشفهية )فC1(فاء املضعف •

:)C2/C3( عينا والما )[z] ز -[s] س—[ş] ص( alveolar مع األصوات األسليةيتنافر )الفاء([f] الشفهي األسناين- فاء- مع )السني([s] األسيل؛ التفاقهام يف االحتكاك والهمس 1.

.[s] فاء لفعل مضعف، عينه والمه هو السني [f]واالنفتاح: فال يقع الفاءويترصف )الفاء( [f] االحتكايك املهموس املنفتح- فاء- عىل باب )رضب( مع )الزاي( [z] األسيل 2.

املجهور املنفتح الذي يختلف معه يف صفة الهمس، يف الفعل (فز- يفز).



عند اختالف الصوت الشفهي غري الخيشومي- فاء- مع األسيل يف اإلطباق ال يترصفان إال عىل باب 3. )رضب(: فال يترصف (الفاء)[f] االحتكايك املهموس املنفتح- فاء- مع (ص)[ş] االحتكايك املهموس

املطبق إال عىل(رضب) يف الفعل (فص- يفص). وال يترصف (الباء)[b] االنفجاري املجهور املنفتح- فاء- مع (ص)[ş] االحتكايك املهموس املطبق إال عىل (رضب) يف الفعل (بص- يبص).

عند اختالف الصوت الشفهي الخيشومي- فاء- مع األسيل يف الخيشومية واإلطباق ال يترصفان إال 4. عىل )نرص(: فال يترصف (م)[m] الشفهي الخيشومي املتوسط املجهور املنفتح- فاء- مع (ص)

[ş] االحتكايك املهموس املطبق إال عىل(نرص)، يف الفعل (مص- ميص).عند اختالف الصوت الشفهي غري الخيشومي مع األسيل يف االحتكاك، واتفاقهام يف االنفتاح ال 5.

يترصفان إال عىل باب )نرص(: فال يترصف (ب) [b] االنفجاري املجهور املنفتح- فاء- مع (س)[s] االحتكايك املهموس املنفتح إال عىل (نرص) يف الفعل (بس- يبس)، وال يترصف (ب) مع

(الزاي)[z] االحتكايك املجهور املنفتح إال عىل (نرص) يف الفعل (بز- يبز).:)[z] ز -[s] س -[ş] ص( alveolar من األصوات األسلية )C1(فاء املضعف •

:)C2/C3( عينا والما )[m] م -[b]ب -[f]مع األصوات الشفهية )فعند اختالف الصوت األسيل- فاء- يف اإلطباق مع الشفهي غري الخيشومي ال يترصفان إال 1.

عىل باب )نرص(: فال يترصف (الصاد)[ş] االحتكايك املهموس املطبق- فاء- مع الشفهيني غري الخيشوميني:(الفاء)[f] االحتكايك املهموس املنفتح، و(الباء)[b] االنفجاري املجهور املنفتح إال

- يصب). عىل (نرص)، يف الفعلني (صف- يصف) و(صبعند اختالف الصوت األسيل- فاء- مع الشفهي يف الجهر، واتفاقهام يف االنفتاح ال يترصفان إال 2. [b](ب) األسيل االحتكايك املهموس املنفتح- فاء- مع ([s] س) عىل باب )نرص(: فال يترصف

االنفجاري املجهور املنفتح إال عىل (نرص)، يف الفعل (سب- يسب)، وال يترصف(س [s])- فاء- مع (م)[m] الشفهي املتوسط املجهور املنفتح إال عىل (نرص)، يف الفعل (سم- يسم).

عند اختالف الصوت األسيل- فاء- مع الشفهي يف الخيشومية، واتفاقهام يف االنفتاح ال يترصفان 3. [m](امليم) األسيل املهموس املنفتح- فاء- مع [s](السني) إال عىل باب )نرص(: فال يترصف

الشفهي الخيشومي املجهور املنفتح إال عىل (نرص)، يف الفعل (سم- يسم)، وال يترصف (الزاي)[z] األسيل املجهور املنفتح- فاء- مع (امليم)[m] إال عىل (نرص) يف الفعل (زم- يزم).

:)[m] م -[b]ب -[f]( من األصوات الشفهية )فC1(فاء املضعف • :)C2/C3( عينا والما )[d] د -[t] ت -[ţ] ط( alveolar مع األصوات النطعية

يتنافر )الفاء([f] الشفهي األسناين االحتكايك املهموس املنفتح- فاء- مع )الطاء([ţ] النطعي 1. االنفجاري املجهور املطبق؛ الختالفهام يف اإلطباق: فال يقع (الفاء)[f] فاء ملضعف عينه والمه هو

(الطاء)[ţ] النطعي.عند اختالف الشفهي- فاء- مع النطعي يف االحتكاك، واتفاقهام يف الهمس واالنفتاح ال يترصفان 2.

إال عىل )نرص(: فال يترصف (الفاء)[f] االحتكايك املهموس املنفتح- فاء- مع (التاء)[t] االنفجاري املهموس املنفتح إال عىل باب (نرص)، يف الفعل (فت- يفت).

عند اتفاق الشفهي- فاء- مع النطعي يف االنفجار والجهر ال يترصفان إال عىل باب )نرص(: فال 3. يترصف (الباء)[b] الشفهي االنفجاري املجهور- فاء- مع (الطاء)[ţ] االنفجاري املجهور املطبق

- يبط)، وال يترصف (الباء)[b]- فاء- مع الدال[d] النطعي إال عىل (نرص)، يف الفعل (بطاالنفجاري املجهور املنفتح إال عىل (نرص)، يف الفعل (بد- يبد).

،[t](التاء)و ،[ţ] (الطاء) الخيشومي املجهور- فاء- مع األصوات النطعية [m])ال يترصف )م 4. والدال[d] إال عىل باب )نرص(، يف األفعال (مط- ميط) و(مت- ميت) و(مد- ميد).

:)[d] د -[t] ت -[ţ] ط( alveolar من األصوات النطعية )C1(فاء املضعف • :)C2/C3( عينا والما )[m] م -[b]ب -[f]مع األصوات الشفهية )ف

يتنافر )التاء([t] النطعي االنفجاري املهموس املنفتح- فاء- مع )الفاء([f] الشفهي االحتكايك 1. .[f](الفاء) فاء للمضعف مع [t](التاء) املهموس املنفتح؛ التفاقهام يف الهمس واالنفتاح: فال يقع



عند اتفاق النطعي- فاء- مع الشفهي يف االنفجار واالنفتاح واختالفهام يف الجهر ال يترصفان 2. [b](الباء) االنفجاري املهموس املنفتح- فاء- مع [t](التاء) إال عىل باب )نرص(: فال يترصف

االنفجاري املجهور املنفتح إال عىل (نرص)، يف الفعل (تب- يتب).عند اختالف النطعي- فاء- مع الشفهي يف االنفجار والهمس والخيشومية ال يترصفان إال عىل 3.

باب )رضب(: فال يترصف (التاء)[t] االنفجاري املهموس املنفتح- فاء- مع (امليم)[m] املتوسط املجهور الخيشـومي إال عىل (رضب)، يف الفعل (تم- يتم).

عند اتفاق النطعي- فاء- مع الشفهي يف االنفجار والجهر واالنفتاح ال يترصفان إال عىل باب 4. )رضب(: فال يترصف (الدال)[d] االنفجاري املجهور- فاء- مع (الباء)[b] االنفجاري املجهور إال

عىل (رضب)، يف الفعل (دب- يدب).عند اختالف النطعي- فاء- مع الشفهي يف االنفجار والهمس واإلطباق ال يترصفان إال عىل 5.

)نرص(: فال يترصف (الطاء)[ţ] النطعي االنفجاري املجهور املطبق- فاء- مع (الفاء)[f] الشفهي االحتكايك املهموس املنفتح إال عىل باب (نرص)، يف الفعل (طف- يطف).

:)[m] م -[b]ب -[f]( من األصوات الشفهية )فC1(فاء املضعف • :)C2/C3( عينا والما )[ð] ذ –[θ] ث -[đ] ظ( interdental مع األصوات اللثوية

إذا اتفق الشفهي- فاء- مع اللثوي يف االحتكاك واالنفتاح ال يترصفان إال عىل باب )نرص(: فال 1. [θ]الشفهي االحتكايك املهموس املنفتح- فاء- مع االحتكاكيني املنفتحني: الثاء )[f]يترصف (الفاء

املهموس، والذال[ð] املجهور إال عىل (نرص)، يف الفعلني (فث- يفث) و(فذ- يفذ).إذا اختلف الشفهي- فاء- مع اللثوي يف الهمس واإلطباق واتفقا يف االحتكاك ال يترصفان إال عىل 2. باب )فتح(: فال يترصف (الفاء)[f] االحتكايك املهموس املنفتح- فاء- مع (الظاء)[đ] االحتكايك

املجهور املطبق إال عىل (فتح)، يف الفعل (فظ- يفظ).إذا اختلف الشفهي- فاء- مع اللثوي يف االنفجار، واتفقا يف الجهر ال يترصفان إال عىل )نرص(: 3.

فال يترصف (الباء)[b] االنفجاري املجهور- فاء- مع االحتكاكيني املجهورين: (الظاء)[đ] املطبق، والذال[ð]) املنفتح إال عىل باب (نرص)، يف الفعلني (بظ- يبظ) و(بذ- يبذ).

:)[ð] ذ -[θ] ث –[đ] ظ( interdental من األصوات اللثوية )C1(فاء املضعف • :)C2/C3( عينا والما )[m] م -[b]ب -[f] مع األصوات الشفهية )ف

يتنافر اللثوي- فاء- مع الشفهي إذا اتفقا يف االحتكاك والهمس واالنفتاح: فال يقع (الثاء) 1. f] االحتكايك املهموس [θ] االحتكايك املهموس املنفتح فاء لفعل مضعف فاؤه هو(الفاء)[

املنفتح.يتنافر اللثوي- فاء- مع الشفهي إذا اختلفا يف االحتكاك واإلطباق واتفقا يف الجهر: فال يقع 2.

(الظاء)[đ] االحتكايك املجهور املطبق فاء مع كل من الشفهيني املجهورين: (الباء)[b] االنفجاري املنفتح، و(امليم) [m] املتوسط الخيشومي املنفتح.

عند اتفاق اللثوي- فاء- مع الشفهي يف االحتكاك، واختالفهام يف الجهر واإلطباق ال يترصفان 3. [f](الفاء) االحتكايك املجهور املطبق- فاء- مع[đ] (الظاء) إال عىل باب )نرص(: فال يترصف

االحتكايك املهموس املنفتح إال عىل باب (نرص)، يف الفعل (ظف- يظف).عند اتفاق اللثوي- فاء- مع الشفهي يف االحتكاك واالنفتاح، واختالفهام يف الجهر ال يترصفان 4.

[f](الفاء) االحتكايك املجهور املنفتح- فاء- مع [ ð](الذال) إال عىل باب )رضب(: فال يترصفاالحتكايك املهموس املنفتح إال عىل باب (رضب)، يف الفعل (ذف- يذف).

عند اختالف اللثوي- فاء مع الشفهي يف الهمس واالحتكاك، واتفاقهام يف االنفتاح ال يترصفان 5. [b](الباء) االحتكايك املهموس املنفتح- فاء- مع [θ](الثاء) إال عىل باب )نرص(: فال يترصف

االنفجاري املجهور املنفتح إال عىل (نرص)، يف الفعل (ثب- يثب)، وال يترصف (الثاء)[θ]- فاء- مع (امليم)[m] املتوسط املجهور املنفتح إال عىل (نرص)، يف الفعل (ثم- يثم).

:)[m] م -[b]ب -[f]( من األصوات الشفهية )فC1(فاء املضعف • :)C2/C3( عينا والما )[n] ن -[l] ل -[r] ر( liquids مع األصوات الذلقية



عند اختالف الشفهي- فاء- مع الذلقي املكرر يف االحتكاك والهمس ال يترصفان إال عىل باب 1. )رضب(: فال يترصف (الفاء)[f] االحتكايك املهموس- فاء- مع (الراء)[r] املتوسط املجهور املكرر

إال عىل باب (رضب) يف الفعل (فر- يفر).عند اختالف الشفهي- فاء- مع الذلقي الخيشومي يف االحتكاك والهمس ال يترصفان إال عىل باب 2.

)نرص(: فال يترصف (الفاء)[f]- فاء- مع (النون)[n] الخيشومي املجهور املتوسط إال عىل (نرص) يف الفعل (فن- يفن).

عند اختالف الشفهي- فاء- مع الذلقي يف االنفجار والخيشومية ال يترصفان إال عىل )رضب(: فال 3. يترصف (الباء)[b] االنفجاري املجهور- فاء- مع (النون)[n]الخيشومي املتوسط املجهور إال عىل

.( باب (رضب) يف الفعل (بن- يبعند اتفاق الشفهي- فاء- مع الذلقي يف الخيشومية والتوسط والجهر ال يترصفان إال عىل )نرص(: 4.

فال يترصف (امليم)[m] الخيشومي املتوسط املجهور- فاء- مع (النون)[n] الخيشومي املتوسط املجهور إال عىل باب (نرص)، يف الفعل (من- مين).

:)[n]ن -[l]ل -[r]ر( liquids من األصوات الذلقية )C1(فاء املضعف • :)C2/C3( عينا والما )[m]م -[b]ب -[f] مع األصوات الشفهية )ف

عند اختالف الذلقي املكرر- فاء- مع الشفهي يف التوسط، واتفاقهام يف الجهر وعدم الخيشومية 1. ال يترصفان إال عىل باب )نرص(: فال يترصف (الراء)[r] املتوسط املجهور املكرر- فاء- مع (الباء)

[b] الشفهي االنفجاري املجهور إال عىل (نرص) يف الفعل (رب- يرب).ال يترصف الذلقي الجانبي- فاء- مع األصوات الشفهية إال عىل باب )نرص(: فال يترصف (الالم) 2.

[l] املجهور الجانبي املتوسط- فاء- مع (الفاء)[f]، و(الباء)[b]، و(امليم)[m]( إال عىل (نرص)، - يلب)، و(مل- يلم). يف األفعال: (لف- يلف)، و(لب

عند اختالف الذلقي الخيشومي- فاء- مع الشفهي يف الجهر اليترصفان إال عىل باب )نرص(: فال 3. يترصف (النون)[n] املتوسط املجهور الخيشومي- فاء- مع (الفاء)[f] االحتكايك املهموس إال عىل

(نرص)، يف الفعل (نف- ينف).عند اتفاق الذلقي الخيشومي- فاء- مع الشفهي يف الجهر اليترصفان إال عىل باب )رضب(: فال 4.

يترصف (النون)[n]املتوسط املجهور الخيشومي- فاء- مع (الباء)[b] الشفهي االنفجاري املجهور إال عىل (رضب)، يف الفعل (نب- ينب).

عند اتفاق الذلقي- فاء- مع الشفهي يف الجهر وعدم الخيشومية ال يترصفان إال عىل )نرص(: فال 5. يترصف (الراء)[r] املتوسط املجهور املكرر- فاء- مع (الباء)[b] االنفجاري املجهور إال عىل باب (نرص)، يف الفعل (رب- يرب)، وال يترصف (الالم)[l] الجانبي- فاء- مع (الباء)[b] االنفجاري

املجهور إال عىل (نرص)، يف الفعل (لب- يلب).:)[m] م -[b]ب -[f]( من األصوات الشفهية )فC1(فاء املضعف •

:)C2/C3( عينا والما )[m] م -[b]ب -[f]مع األصوات الشفهية )فتتنافر األصوات الشفوية مع بعضها: فال يقع أحدها فاء، واآلخر عينا والما للمضعف. ـ

قواعد عامة:تتنافر األصوات الشفوية مع بعضها: فال يقع أحدها فاء، واآلخر عينا والما للمضعف. 1.

ال يترصف (امليم)[m] الشفهي الخيشومي املتوسط املجهور- فاء- إال عىل باب (نرص) مع: 2. صويت اللهاة والحنك velar (ق[q]– ك [k](، يف الفعلني (مق- ميق)، (مك- ميك). أ-

األصوات الشجرية palatal (ج ʤ- ش [∫]– ض [ď](، يف األفعال (مج- ميج)، (مش- ب- ميش)، (مض- ميض).

- - ميط)، (مت األصوات النطعية alveolar (ط [ţ]– ت [t]– د [d](، يف األفعال (مط ج- - ميد). ميت)، (مد

- األصوات املطبقة velarized (ص [ş]– ض [ď]– ط [ţ]– ظ [đ]( يف األفعال (مص د- - ميظ). - ميط)، (مظ - ميض)، (مط ميص)، (مض



-[s]فاء- عىل بايب (نرص) و(فتح) مع األسليني االحتكاكيني املنفتحني (س -[m](امليم) يترصف 3. - ميز/ميز)، وكذلك مع الذلقيني املتوسطني املنفتحني ز[z])، يف الفعلني (مس- ميس/ميس)، (مز

- ميل/ميل). - مير/مير)، (مل غري الخيشوميني (ر[r]- ل [l](، يف الفعلني (مر.4 ال يترصف الشفهيان غري االنفجاريني (ف[f]- م[m])- فاء- إال عىل (نرص)، مع صويت حيز اللهاة velar (ق[q]- ك[k](، يف األفعال (فق- يفق)،(فك- يفك)، ومع أصوات شجر الفم palatal (ج

ʤ- ش [∫]- ض[ď](، يف األفعال (فج- يفج)، (فش- يفش)، فض- يفض).

املصادر واملراجع:

االسرتاباذى )رىض الدين محمد بن الحسن(:رشح شافية ابن الحاجب (تحقيق الزفزاف)- دار الكتب العلمية – بريوت 1982.

ابن جنى )أبو الفتح عثامن(:الخصائص – تحقيق النجار – ط2 – دارالهدى – بريوت (ب ت). -

رس صناعة اإلعراب- تحقيق هنداوي– ط2 – دار القلم – دمشق 1993. -الخليل بن أحمدالفراهيدي:

كتاب العني – تحقيق عبد الله درويش – بغداد 1967. -كتاب العني – تحقيق مهدي املخزومي، إبراهيم السامرايئ– دار الرشيد– بغداد 1982. -

ابن درستويه )عبد الله بن جعفر(:تصحيح الفصيح ورشحه– مجلس الشئون اإلسالمية- القاهرة 1419هـ.

ابن دريد )أبو بكر محمد بن الحسن(: جمهرة اللغة – دار صادر – بريوت.

الرسقسطى )أبو عثامن سعيد بن محمد املعافرى(:كتاب األفعال– الهيئة العامة لشئون املطابع األمريية– القاهرة 1992.

سيبويه )أبوبرش عمرو بن عثامن بن قنرب(:الكتاب ج4 – ط2– مكتبة الخانجي– القاهرة 1982.

السيوطى )عبد الرحمن جالل الدين(:املزهر ىف علوم اللغة وأنواعها-املكتبة العرصية- بريوت 1986. -

همع الهوامع يف رشح جمع الجوامع- تحقيق أحمد شمس الدين– ط1– دارالكتب العلمية-بريوت 1998. -الفارايب )إسحق بن إبراهيم(:

ديوان األدب—تحقيق أحمد مختار عمر- مطبوعات مجمع اللغة العربية، القاهرة 1975. الفريوزابادى )مجد الدين محمد بن يعقوب(:

القاموس املحيط – دار الكتاب العريب– بدون تاريخ أو مكان الطبع. ابن القطاع )الصقىل(:

أبنية األسامء واألفعال واملصادر– ت أحمد عبد الدايم–طدار الكتب املرصية– القاهرة 1999. ابن القوطية )أبو بكر محمد بن عمر(:

كتاب األفعال- الطبعة الثانية- مكتبة الخانجي- القاهرة 1993. املربد )أبو العباس محمد بن يزيد(:

املقتضب – املجلس األعىل للشئون اإلسالمية – القاهرة 1399. ابن منظور )جامل الدين أبو الفضل محمد(:

لسان العرب – دار املعارف – القاهرة 1981. وفاء كامل فايد:

أثر تجاور صويت الفعل الثاليث املضعف ىف بابه الرصيف: دراسة يف حيزي الحلق والشفتني: مؤمتر مجمع -اللغة العربية بالقاهرة، عام 2009.



أثر تجاور صويت الفعل الثاليث املضعف يف بابه الرصيف: دراسة يف األحياز الوسطية: مؤمتر مجمع اللغة -العربية بالقاهرة، أبريل 2010.

األفعال املضعفة وأبوابها الرصفية “: املجلة العربية للعلوم اإلنسانية- جامعة الكويت- ع 74- س19، -عام 2001.

الباب الرصيف للفعل املضعف وأحياز أصواته: دراسة يف األحياز الوسطية والذلقية، ضمن بحوث -الكتاب التذكاري (مثرات االمتنان)- مكتبة الخانجي، ط1– القاهرة 2002.

تراكب األصوات يف الفعل الثاليث الصحيح- عامل الكتب- القاهرة 1991. -مدى ارتباط الفعـل الثاليث الصحيح باملضارع املفتوح العني– دراسة إحصائية عىل القاموس املحيط(، -

العدد 58: مجلة كليةاآلداب- جامعة القاهرة: مارس 1993.ابن يعيش )موفق الدين يعيش بن عىل(:

رشح املفصل- عامل الكتب- بريوت، ب ت.

Note

وفاء كامل فايد: تراكب األصوات يف الفعل الثاليث الصحيح -عامل الكتب- القاهرة 1991. 1. ميكن أن تتلخص قواعد تنافر األصوات يف هذا الكتاب فيام ييل: 2.

وحدة مخرج الصوتني. 1. قرب املخرج يف الصوتني، وميكن أن يكون وحده سببا يف تنافرهام، كام ميكن أن ينضاف إليه اتفاقهام يف 2.

اإلطباق أو االنفتاح، أو تضادهام يف الصفتني.وحدة املخرج وتطابق الصفات (حالة تجاور الصوت مع نفسه(. 3.

اختالف مخرج الصوتني مع تضادهام من حيث اإلطباق. 4. بـعد مخرج الصوتني واتفاق الصفات فيهام. 5.

معظم أفعال اللغة العربية ثالثية أي أنها تتكون من ثالثة حروف أصلية تؤدي املعنى. وقد يكون الفعل الثاليث 3. مجردا أي يقترص عىل حروفه األصلية فقط مثل: خرج، رضب، سمح، كرم، علم، حسب. كام ميكن أن يكون الفعل الثاليث للفعل، كام يف: املعنى األصيل الزائدة إضافة إىل (سألتمونيها) فتفيد األحرف تزاد عليه بعض حروف كلمة بأن مزيدا،

استخرج، تضارب، أكرم ، تعلم.. ، جد أما الفعل الثاليث املجرد املضعف trilateral abstract geminateفهو ما تكرر فيه الحرفان الثاين والثالث، مثل: شبconso- اختار العرب مقياسا لضبط صيغ الكلامت العربية، يسمى (امليزان الرصيف) وأشاروا إليه بالصوامت 4.

nants (ف ع ل): C1 = (ف)، C2 = (ع)، C3 = ل، مع ضبط حركتها وفقا لحركات الكلمة التي توزن. مثال ذلك األفعال:

ذهب: وزنه: فـعـل – فـهـم: وزنه: فـعـل - حسـن: وزنه: فـعـل.

والفعل الثاليث املجرد trilateral abstract verbيترصف عىل ستة أوزان رصفية—هي األبواب الرصفية: ) (ينـرص). فعل ومضارعه: يفعـل، مثل: (نرص -1

فعل ومضارعه: يـفـعـل، مثل: (رضب) (يـرضب). -2 فعل ومضارعه: يـفـعـل، مثل (فـتح) (يفـتـح). -3 فعـل ومضارعه: يفـعـل، مثل: (كـرم) (يـكـرم). -4

فـعـل ومضارعه: يـفـعـل، مثل (فـرح) (يفـرح). -5 فـعـل ومضارعه: يـفـعـل، مثل: (حسب) (يحسب). -6

األحياز جمع: حيـز، وهو مساحة تشتمل عىل أكرث من مخرج، وتكون املخارج فيها متقاربة، انظر: املصطلحات. 5. فاء الفعل هو الصوت الصامت األول منه first consonant (C1)، وعينه هو الصامت الثاين (C2)، والمه هو 6.

الصامت الثالث (C3). ويف الفعل املضعف Geminate يكون عني الفعل (C2) والمه (C3) صوتا واحدا مكررا.(الباء) صوت مخرجه من بني الشفتني bilabial، و(الفاء) صوت شفهي أسناينlabiodental ، ويجمعهام حيز 7.

الشفتني.



(النون) صوت ذلقي خيشوميnasal ، و(الالم) صوت ذلقي جانبيlateral ، ويجمعهام حيز واحد هو ذولق 8. . (alveolar) اللسان

يشمل هذا الحيز صويت (الباء) و(امليم) ومخرجهام من بني الشفتني bilabial، و(الفاء) ومخرجه شفهي أسناين 9. . labiodental

سيبويه: الكتاب ج4–ط2، مكتبة الخانجي– القاهرة 1982: 4/417، املبد: املقتضب- املجلس األعىل للشئون 10. اإلسالمية -القاهرة 1399: 1/381، تصحيح الفصيح: 37، األفعال البن القوطية: ص1، الرسقسطي: كتاب األفعال– الهيئة

العامة لشئون املطابع األمريية– القاهرة 1992: 1/57.ابن جني: الخصائص– ط 2 دارالهدى، بريوت: 1/379، وشاركه الجوهري الرأي يف لسان العرب (ب ت ت): 11. القوطية ص1، وأفعال الرسقسطي ابن أفعال أيضا يف 1981، وورد القاهرة – املعارف – دار العرب ابن منظور: لسان

.1/57–58السيوطي: همع الهوامع يف رشح جمع الجوامع- ت: أحمد شمس الدين– ط1 – دار الكتب العلمية – بريوت 12.

.3/272 :1998وهي األفعال املضعفة:(أب، أت، أث، أج، أح، أد، أر، أز،أس، أش، أص، أض، أط، أف، أك، أل، أم، أن، بت، بث، 13. بج، بح، بد، بذ، بر، بز، بس، بش، بص، بض، بط، بظ، بع، بق، بك، بل، بن، به، تب، تخ، تر، تك، تل، تم، ثج، ثر، ثط، ثع،

ثل، ثم(. 14. By checking the fifty verbs mentioned above, we have tried to verify what the early gram-marians said, namely: that the second consonant [C2] of transitive geminate verbs is followed by the vowel [u] in the present tense, and the second consonant [C2] of the intransitive geminate verbs is followed by the vowel [I] in the present tense.

املخرج هو: point of articulation وسريد تحت عنوان املصطلحات. 15. الفراهيدي (الخليل بن أحمد(: كتاب العني – تحقيق عبد الله درويش – بغداد 1967: ص 68. 16.

ابن دريد: جمهرة اللغة – دار صادر – بريوت: املقدمة ص 9. 17. املرجع السابق: ص 11، بترصف. 18.

يف رس صناعة اإلعراب—ت:هنداوى – ط2 – دار القلم – دمشق 1993: 2/816، 1/65. 19. املرجع السابق: 2/814. 20. املرجع السابق: 2/818. 21. املرجع السابق: 2/817. 22.

.bilabial من مخرج واحد هو الشفتان [w] والواو [m] وامليم [b] الباء 23. .[х] والخاء [γ] والغني [ħ] والحاء [ʕ] والعني [h] والهاء [ʔ] أصوات الحلق هي: الهمزة 24.

رشح الشافية: 1/122. 25. ورد ملخص هذه األسس يف مقدمة البحث- وفاء كامل فايد: تراكب األصوات يف الفعل الثاليث الصحيح—ص 26.

.167–8استقصت الباحثة (وفاء كامل فايد( األفعال الثالثية الصحيحة يف القاموس املحيط يف عدد من البحوث: أحدها 27. يعالج أحوال تآلف األصوات وتنافرها يف الفعل الثاليث الصحيح، ىف كتاب: (تراكب األصوات يف الفعل الثاليث الصحيح: دراسة استقصائية يف القاموس املحيط)- عامل الكتب- القاهرة 1991، والثاين يرصد أحوال ترصف الفعل الثاليث الصحيح عىل األبواب الرصفية، وعنوانه: (مدى ارتباط الفعـل الثاليث الصحيح باملضارع املفتوح العني– دراسة إحصائية عىل القاموس املحيط(، العدد 58: مجلة كلية اآلداب- جامعة القاهرة: مارس 1993، والثالث يرصد أثر صفات األصوات عىل الباب الرصيف للفعل املضعف، يف كتاب (الباب الرصيف وصفات األصوات: دراسة يف الفعل الثاليث املضعف)، ط1- عامل الكتب، 2001، والرابع بعنوان “األفعال املضعفة وأبوابها الرصفية “: املجلة العربية للعلوم اإلنسانية- جامعة الكويت- ع 74- س19، عام 2001، والخامس بعنوان (الباب الرصيف للفعل املضعف وأحياز أصواته: دراسة يف األحياز الوسطية والذلقية)، ضمن بحوث كتاب

(مثرات االمتنان)- مكتبة الخانجي، ط1 – القاهرة 2002.يحتوى القاموس املحيط عىل ستني ألف مادة من مواد اللغة، أي ثالثة أرباع املواد التي يضمها لسان العرب. 28.

النصل هنا يعني سطح اللسان. 29. استخدم الخليل هذا املصطلح بكرثة ىف كتاب العني ، ص 64/65. 30.

استخدم سيبويه هذا املصطلح: الكتاب: 4/436. وهناك من يعب عنه بالرتقيق، ىف مقابل التفخيم. 31. ابن جني:” والحروف التي بني الشديدة والرخوة مثانية، وهي األلف والعني والياء والالم والنون والراء وامليم 32.

والواو”: رس صناعة اإلعراب 1/61.



الكتاب: ج4- ص 435. 33. اختلف سيبويه ىف ترتيب الصوامت عن الخليل ، وكان ترتيب الحروف عند سيبويه كام يىل: 34.

الهمزة واأللف والهاء والعني والحاء والغني والخاء، والقاف والكاف، والجيم والشني والياء، والضاد، والالم والنون والراء، 4/433. و سقط الكتاب والواو: وامليم والباء والفاء والثاء، والذال والظاء والصاد، والسني والزاى والتاء، والدال والطاء مخرج الالم من طبعة الكتاب، تحقيق (هارون). وقد اتفق ابن جنى مع سيبويه ىف ترتيبه، واعرتض عىل ترتيب الخليل: رس

الصناعة 1/45.الكتاب: 4/433. 35.

الكتاب: 4/433: “ومن أقىص اللسان وما فوقه من الحنك األعىل مخرج القاف. ومن أسفل من موضع القاف 36. من اللسان قليال، ومام يليه من الحنك (األعىل) مخرج الكاف”. وباملعنى ىف املقتضب: 1/328 ويف رس الصناعة: 1/47، و

رشح املفصل: 10/124، وهمع الهوامع: 2/227.العني: 64، الكتاب 4/433: “ ومن وسط اللسان بينه وبني وسط الحنك األعىل مخرج الجيم والشني والياء”. 37. واتفق معه ابن جني ىف رس صناعة اإلعراب: 1/46. وىف رشح املفصل: 10/124 “الجيم والشني والياء ولها حيز واحد، وهو جر: مفرج الفم- ألن مبدأها من شجر الفم..والضاد من حيز الجيم وسط اللسان بينه وبني وسط الحنك، وهى شجرية- والش

والشني والياء”. العني: 1/64، واملقتضب 1/329، وىف رشح املفصل: 10/125: “ الصاد والسني والزاى من حيز واحد، وهو ما 38.

بني الثنايا وطرف اللسان، وهى أسلية ألن مبدأها من أسلة اللسان وهو مستدق طرف اللسان، وهى حروف الصفري”.العني: 1/64، رشح املفصل: 10/125: “ والطاء والدال والتاء من حيز واحد ، هو ما بني طرف اللسان وأصول 39.

الثنايا، وهى نطعية ألن مبدأها من نطع الغار األعىل، وهو وسطه، يظهر فيه كالتحزيز “.العني: 1/65، رشح املفصل: 10/125: “والظاء والذال والثاء من حيز واحد، هو ما بني طرف اللسان وأصول 40.

الثنايا، وهى لثوية ألن مبدأها من اللثة”.مل يورد القاموس املحيط الفعل (مح( عىل باب (فتح)، وأورده اللسان. ويختلف معنى الفعل (مح( عىل األبواب 41.

الثالثة.(مس) الفعل (فتح)، ومعنى باب الباحثة مع أدمجته الذي (علم) باب (مس) من أن القاموس عىل نبه 42.

مختلف عىل البابني).نبه القاموس عىل أن (مز) من باب (علم): “ مززت بالكرس متز: رصت مزيزا أي فاضال”. ومعناه مختلف عىل 43.

البابني .صوت (الطاء) انفجاري مجهور عند القدماء، وفقا لوصف سيبويه. وهو مهموس يف النطق الحديث. 44.

يتفق سلوك املضعف هنا مع سلوك الفعل الثاليث الصحيح غري املضعف: تراكب األصوات 31، 59، 65. 45. يترصف الفعل (حب( أيضا عىل باب (رضب)، وقد نبه القاموس إىل أن باب (رضب) فيه شاذ. 46.

يترصف الفعل (حف( عىل باب (نرص) أيضا، ومعناه مختلف عىل البابني. 47. وفقا للنطق القديم ، كام وصفه سيبويه. 48.


Al-ʾArabiyya, 46 (2013), 109–121

Abstract

Recent years have seen major developments in the teaching and learning of Arabic as a foreign language. As a result of the surge in interest in learning Arabic, Arabic prac-titioners have attempted to develop new theoretical approaches to the teaching of the language. This surge in interest has also resulted in an ever-expanding number of Ara-bic programs in various universities and colleges across the United States. This expan-sion has made critical the development of new Arabic textbooks and learning materi-als, in such a way as to apply different theoretical approaches on one hand, and to meet the various needs of Arabic language learners on the other hand. However, how Arabic language materials are designed and evaluated is rarely examined and perhaps poorly understood––yet it is of critical importance in order to understand the complexities of both Arabic language learning and teaching. The present paper surveys a selection of current Arabic materials produced over the last 30–40 years in order to examine the different perspectives they demonstrate, as well as the extent to which their users find them useful and appropriate for their needs. Working criteria are established in order to achieve an understanding of the orga-nized principles involved and to determine how far the materials in question match up with the expectations of target learners and teachers, and the needs and goals of the program. We also look at how these materials compare with recent findings in second

Arabic Language Learning TextbooksAn Evaluation of Current Approaches

Kassem M. Wahba and Aja Q. Chaker, Georgetown University


110 KASSEM M. WAHBA AND AJA Q. CHAKER

language acquisition research. We conclude with a discussion of the main weaknesses and strengths of the selected language materials and share what sort of developments we would like to see in the future.

The number of Arabic learning materials (ALM) has exploded in recent years—a result of the increasing number of Arabic programs on one hand, and the adoption of new theoretical approaches—so the need for some measure of accountability has grown as well. Indeed, sponsors of learners of Arabic who invest their time and money in the language learning process want to know not just if Arabic programs can handle this increased number of Arabic learners, but also if the ALM currently being used are able to adequately meet learners’ needs. The adequacy of today’s ALM to do just that has inspired the present study. In this paper we examine a selection of primary Arabic textbooks in order to draw attention to the most recent trends observed in ALM, investigate the extent to which ALM meet the needs of learners who would like to function adequately in the Arab world, and finally, explore what room there may be for improvement. The paper starts with a brief discussion of the methodology used in the study. The analysis and evaluation of select language textbooks follows, and the paper concludes with a brief discussion of the future of the field of ALM development.1

Methodology

Textbook SelectionA survey was conducted between December 2009 and January 2010 to determine what sources are used most frequently in the teaching of Arabic in postsecondary institu-tions in the United States. More than 75 teachers and administrators, recruited through Arabic-L listserve, participated.2 They were asked to provide information regarding the primary texts they used in teaching—Modern Standard Arabic (MSA) and any other Arabic dialect at the beginning, intermediate, and advanced levels. They were also asked to name any other materials used, and to share any comments or concerns they had regarding available ALM. Since the present study is a preliminary attempt to analyze and evaluate ALM, our examination was narrowed to only one proficiency level. Thus, only the three most fre-quently used books at the beginner level were selected for evaluation. In alphabetical order by publisher, and with a brief introduction to each, they are as follows: al-Kitāb al-Asāsī, Volume 1. (Al-Kitāb al-Asāsī fī ta‘allum al-lugha al-‘arabiyya li-ghayr al-nātiqīn biha). Written by El-Said Badawi et al. and published by the American Univer-sity in Cairo Press (by arrangement with the Arab League Educational, Cultural, and Sci-entific Organization), this book is the first volume in a series of three books. Originally published in 1983 and revised in 2008, the book covers the Arabic letters and sounds and basic grammar and vocabulary in 36 chapters. The book includes a glossary on CD, with translations between Arabic and English, French, Spanish, and German, as well as a teacher’s book (not evaluated).


Arabic Language Learning Textbooks 111

Alif Baa, third edition, and al-Kitaab (al-Kitaab fii Ta‘allum al-‘Arabiyya) Part 1, second edition. Written by Kristen Brustad, Mahmoud al-Batal, and Abbas al-Tonsi, and pub-lished by Georgetown University Press, these two books are the first two volumes in a series of four books that are designed for beginning, intermediate, and advanced pro-ficiency language levels, covers Arabic letters and sounds, basic vocabulary, and some grammar in ten units in the first book, Alif Baa, third edition (2010), and builds on this foundation in 20 units in the second book, al-Kitaab Part 1, second edition (2004). Each book includes English–Arabic and Arabic–English glossaries, DVD scripts, verb conju-gation, pronoun and grammar charts, and a grammar index. Alhan wa Sahlan. Written by Mahdi Alosh and revised with Allen Clark, this book is published by Yale University Press (2009). Among the changes to the book since its first publication is the separation of the teaching of the Arabic letters and sounds from the main part of the text and the placement of this part of the curriculum into a new sounds and script workbook covering six chapters. The student textbook expands on this foundation in 24 chapters. The books are the first two volumes in a series of three books covering the beginning and intermediate levels.

CriteriaA set of criteria were adapted from studies by Tomlinson et al. (2001), Sheldon (1988), and McDonough and Shaw (2003). Each textbook/student workbook was examined, with special attention paid to the following criteria: (a) external features: publishers’ claims, appearance, design, and illustrations; and (b) internal features: syllabus and approach to the Arabic letters and sounds, vocabulary, grammar, and diglossia. Team members independently evaluated the materials, taking extensive notes that were then shared and discussed. Throughout our examination, we kept the following questions in mind: Do the materials meet the needs of learners who would like to func-tion adequately in the Arab world? What trends in teaching and learning Arabic are apparent? This paper is not a comprehensive overview of all available Arabic language teaching materials in use; instead, it is a snapshot of what is happening today in field of ALM, spe-cifically at the beginning level. Our intentions are to inform and to provide suggestions for future development.

Analysis and Evaluation

Textbook Features: ExternalPublishers’ claims.Our concern was what publishers and authors said about the purpose of each book, its intended audience, the variety used, and any testing procedures carried out in the course of designing the textbook. al-Kitāb al-Asāsī: This series, consisting of three volumes, is designed to enable non-native learners reach a level of autonomy in learning MSA. The first volume is designed to provide nonnative learners of Arabic with the basics—Arabic letters and sounds,



sentence structures, vocabulary, and cultural content—so that they are able to reach the intermediate level. It approaches the language through themed topics tackling daily life situations in the Arab world, focusing primarily on listening and speaking, and second-arily on reading and writing. In each lesson vocabulary is built up as various linguistic structures are introduced; both are reinforced through texts. It was unclear whether the materials were tested before publication; however, the authors mention that grammar-sequencing, from simple to complex, and the design of all exercises, are based on their long experience in the field of teaching Arabic to nonnative speakers. Alif Baa and al-Kitaab: This series, consisting of four volumes (two of which are eval-uated here), is designed to enable learners to reach an advanced level of proficiency. The first level consists of two books covering the first year of Arabic: Alif Baa and al-Kitaab Part 1. The first book is intended to help the student learn to pronounce the sounds of Arabic, write its letters, and begin speaking, and the second is designed to build on the introductory book and further develop skills in MSA. The 2010 third edition of Alif Baa incorporates MSA and two dialects: Egyptian, and Levantine; al-Kitaab Part 1, sec-ond editionfocuses on MSA and Egyptian. The publisher and authors do not mention whether the texts were formally tested prior to publication, but they do note that the philosophy guiding the materials is based on collective, long-term classroom experience and consultation with various teachers. Ahlan wa Sahlan: The first book is designed to introduce the Arabic sound and writ-ing system and provide basic structural and lexical knowledge that will allow the learner to communicate in Arabic. The author explains that the Arabic presented in this text-book––MSA–– is the standard language used in education, the media, and formal situ-ations. The second book is designed to provide learners with basic structural and lexical knowledge to enable them to function completely in Arabic. Both books cover the first year of Arabic. While the first book is designed as a workbook to accompany the student textbook, the publisher notes that it can be used for independent study as an introduction to Arabic orthography, basic vocabulary, and culture. By completing the full course, the average learner may expect to achieve the ACTFL proficiency level of Intermediate Mid.

Overall appearance.While al-Kitāb al-Asāsī has a gradeschool grammar book feel, in general, each of the three books we reviewed were professionally produced and visually attractive. This is especially the case for the new editions of Ahlan wa Sahlan and Alif Baa, where the use of color and illustrations has drastically improved in comparison with previous editions. Interestingly, both of these books seem to have taken a page out of Badawi’s book by using color to highlight particular letters and sounds being taught during the alphabet-learning phase, and throughout the rest of the book as well with the widespread use of illustrations.

Design.Of the three series, Alif Baa and Ahlan wa Sahlan are the best in terms of overall design, although al-Kitāb al-Asāsī is also designed well. The balance of text and white space and use of color are exceptional, and chapters are clearly demarcated.



Illustrations.The illustrations in the early stages of all three books are functional for the purposes of learning vocabulary, although the new editions of Ahlan wa Sahlan and Alif Baa tend to use more modern images. Additionally, Ahlan wa Sahlan uses high-resolution photos that are representative of the Arab world and Arab culture to kick off each chapter; this is not present in the other books we reviewed. It also features numerous color charts and summary boxes to emphasize grammatical points—although this feature is pres-ent in Alif Baa, third ediiton, it is largely missing in the follow-up text, al-Kitaab, second edition. While al-Kitāb al-Asāsī features colorful drawings for vocabulary, themes, and topics, these are largely hand-drawn and lack a modern feel. Of the books examined, al-Kitaab, second edition, is arguably the least up-to-date in terms of illustrations (see pp. 180–81, for example). Although its companion book Alif Baa, third edition, does employ more modern images (and color illustrations), the func-tion of those images is not always immediately apparent. One must take into account that Alif Baa and al-Kitaab were reviewed while they were in transition to the third edi-tion, so some changes may yet be made.

Textbook Features: InternalSyllabus.We examined the “content map” of each textbook to discover the similarities and dif-ferences in coverage, as well as the organizing principles that shape the book’s content (Masuhara et al. 2008). All three textbooks share the general goal of taking students from level zero to intermediate, and all provide learning objectives to guide the student. Ahlan wa Sahlan specifies its learning objectives in each lesson, whereas the other two textbooks specify their objectives only once, in the introduction. All three books use different organizing principles. Specifically, al-Kitāb al-Asāsī takes daily life situations as the main organizing principle for introducing vocabulary and grammatical structures. It claims to focus more on listening and speaking, particu-larly when dealing with daily life situations, than on reading and writing (the other two textbooks claim to cover the four language skills equally, in addition to culture). In the case of al-Kitaab, Part 1, second edition, content is organized around the stories of Maha and Khalid, who describe their lives in America and Egypt; their monologues precede each chapter, and although they are not intellectually stimulating, they do keep the learners wondering “what’s next?” Ahlan wa Sahlan’s content is organized largely around the stories of Michael and Adnan, two students studying abroad in Egypt and the United States, who write postcards, diary entries, etc., about their experiences. While al-Kitāb al-Asāsī takes more a structural approach linked to social situations or themes, the al-Kitaab program syllabus adopts a functional communicative approach directed at developing the four language skills. It provides the learner with the vocabu-lary and grammatical structures necessary to use Arabic in tasks that require speaking, listening, reading, and writing skills in an integrated way. Additionally, while al-Kitāb al-Asāsī and Ahlan wa Sahlan make it a point to teach MSA, the authors of the al-Kitaab program take the position that Arabic is one language that consists of a formal variety



(MSA) used for reading and writing, and regional varieties used mainly for speaking. Therefore, a small section is included in each lesson that focuses on the regional dialect. As for the lesson structure, each chapter in al-Kitaab, Part 1, second edition, usually includes the following components: vocabulary, culture, grammar, listening, and read-ing. However, sometimes this arrangement varies for no apparent reason—it is unclear why, for example, some chapters feature one section on culture and others three, or why some chapters change the order of topics altogether. The order of al-Kitāb al-Asāsī is as follows: situation (for reading and/or listening), then vocabulary and exercises. The exercises also come in a particular order: vocabulary; grammatical structures; compre-hension questions on the text; reading aloud; and, finally, writing. The Ahlan wa Sahlan syllabus is functional/structural; in each chapter the authors present lesson objectives, a text for reading, and finally drills and activities focused on the vocabulary and struc-tures needed to fulfill the learning objectives. However, emphasizing the relationship between grammatical structure and function in Ahlan wa Sahlan seems to give the impression that it is a one-to-one relationship, which is not necessarily true. In terms of content coverage, there are many similarities: general topics such as greetings, introductions, food, drinks, describing an apartment, talking about family and the weather, etc., are covered in all three books. But there are also differences; for example, Arab newspapers and religious festivals are shared by two books, and geog-raphy, especially that of the Arab world, receives much greater attention in Ahlan wa Sahlan (p. 446). Additionally, al-Kitāb al-Asāsī presents themes reflecting Arab culture (i.e., traditional family roles, etc.), whereas the other two books tend to present topics that appeal to the young foreign learner—especially those that stress the comparison between Arab and Western cultures. In al-Kitaab (lessons 15 and 19), the issue of iden-tity between two cultures is dealt with, and Ahlan wa Sahlan (lesson 22) compares TV programs in both the Arab world and the United States.

Arabic letters and sounds.al-Kitāb al-Asāsī: The letters of the alphabet are introduced in the traditional manner outlined by the Arab grammarian al-Xalīl ibn Ahmad (110 AH/718 CE), that is, accord-ing to the point of articulation. In other words, Badawi begins by teaching letters whose sounds start at the lips, and then moves gradually to teaching letterswhose production is unseen, that is, those that are articulated in the pharyngeal cavity. The sounds within words are on a CD (and are presumably taught by the teacher). Perhaps as a result of the primary emphasis of this text being listening and speaking, it features no explanations regarding how the letters themselves are actually written, and writing exercises in the early stages are limited. Alif Baa, third edition: Technical descriptions in describing sounds are avoided; instead, tips and exercises focusing on points of articulation are provided. Translit-eration is used to introduce new vocabulary involving letters the student has not yet learned; this largely disappears by the end of the book. In terms of writing, the Arabic letters are taught according to the contempo-rary alphabet (alif, baa’, etc.), with the exception that waaw, yaa’, and the short vow-els are introduced with first four letters. The DVD features a master calligrapher who



demonstrates how each letter is formed. Students are expected to learn how to write the letters at home, leaving class time for dictation, listening, and speaking. The primary emphasis at this stage is on pronunciation. Ahlan wa Sahlan: Very technical, detailed phonetic descriptions for the pronuncia-tion of Arabic letters are provided. A guide to the organs of speech, complete with a chart detailing the various points of articulation, is also provided. Arabic script is intro-duced not in alphabetical order but according to how similarly letters are written.

Vocabulary.al-Kitāb al-Asāsī: The vocabulary is selected based on early word-frequency studies and is presented with vowels. In the early stages, vocabulary is introduced through picture association; later, it is presented first in context—through dialogues—and then in lists. There is extensive recycling of vocabulary but no English translation. Approximately 122 words are presented over the course of the first 11 units; in the remaining chapters, 989 words are introduced (for a total of 1,111 words). Alif Baa, third edition, and al-Kitaab, Part 1, second edition: The vocabulary in Alif Baa is introduced in English with MSA, Egyptian, and Levantine Arabic translation—but without vowels. Transliteration is supplied when words are introduced that include letters that have not yet been learned, or where the dialects affect pronunciation of par-ticular letters. Of approximately 200 vocabulary words introduced in the book, 25 con-stitute a basic colloquial vocabulary that will theoretically allow learners to express themselves and communicate with native speakers in their immediate environment who will not engage in fuṣħa. These words, which include items such as mish and ma (both for negation) and feen/ween (“where?”), are similar to the high-frequency verbs and function words outlined by Karin Ryding (1991) that “cover a great deal of common discourse ground and make life much easier for the speaker/hearer” (215). Otherwise, vocabulary selection in this segment of the series seems rather haphazard. Among the first words a learner acquires, for example, are dajāj (“chicken”) and jār (“neighbor”), which are provided in a list as opposed to appearing within any authentic, meaning-ful context. Similarly, in al-Kitaab, each chapter begins with a list of vocabulary items based on the Maha/Khalid narrative. This results in some of the first words learned being al-‘Umam al-Muttaħida (“United Nations”) and maktab al-qubūl (“office of admis-sions”). One wonders whether more practical vocabulary, or perhaps at least more high-frequency vocabulary, would better serve learners at this stage in the language-learning process. The total number of words (active and passive) in Alif Baa is approximately 366. However, when one counts only MSA items, this number falls to 294. In al-Kitaab, 832 fuṣħa words are introduced across 20 lessons. This brings the total to 1,126. Obviously, when dialect vocabulary is added in, this number skyrockets—with this (perceived?) learning burden, it is no wonder some consider the Arabic language “super hard.” Ahlan wa Sahlan: The earliest vocabulary consists of phrases and basic conversa-tional components meant to enable the learner to engage in authentic communication with native speakers from the outset, without having had to master the sounds and let-ters first. Then, words are introduced in English, with Arabic translation, occasional



transliteration, and all vowels. Eventually, the author introduces vocabulary items related to the student’s immediate environment, such as items found in the classroom; in later stages, vocabulary is chosen based on the objectives that guide each lesson. The total number of vocabulary words in the letters and sounds book is approximately 166; this number includes words not typically considered vocabulary items, such as the names of the Arabic letters and Arab human names. The main text provides 1,133 vocabulary items over the course of 24 lessons, bringing the total to 1,299. Nation (2001) points out that in the case of English, knowledge of approximately 2,000 words is required for reading proficiency; however, the first 1,000 are the most critical, in that they make up 80 percent of the words covered in a given text. How does this apply to Arabic? Arabic is unique in that proficiency in reading and speaking often require markedly different vocabulary sets—and thus more vocabulary. Nevertheless, each of the three series reviewed here introduces approximately 1,000 Arabic words by the end of the first year. It would be helpful to know how much each book’s vocabulary selection has in common with the other books, and to compare the content of these selections with Arabic word-frequency studies. Of course, word-frequency studies for both written and spoken Arabic would be required, but such an effort would assist mate-rials designers and teachers in ascertaining how many of these 1,000 words are actually critical for the attainment of a particular proficiency (oral or written). It could be argued that Brustad, al-Batal, and al-Tonsi are attempting to bridge the gap between written and spoken proficiency by providing both forms of vocabulary words and structures (formal for reading and colloquial for speaking) in Alif Baa, third edition. However, assuming they will continue this new approach in al-Kitaab, Parts 1 and 2, third edition, it remains to be seen, as well as how this will play out with regard to poten-tial linguistic dissonance and an increased learning burden that students might face.

Grammar.al-Kitāb al-Asāsī: All texts are vowelled initially, although eventually the author shifts to unvowelled texts. Grammatical points are introduced gradually, based on each chapter’s thematic topic, and are arranged from the easiest to the most complex (according to the author’s perception—e.g., noun, nominal sentence, verbal sentence; present tense before past, etc.). The author introduces sentence structure from the start, whereas case endings are introduced from lesson 13; according to the author, introducing both sen-tence structure and case endings together at the same time is difficult for learners. One wonders if such a claim is true; empirical testing would be useful here. In general, the author employs the inductive method throughout the book, that is, there are no explicit explanations of grammar points. Instead, students are provided examples wherein a grammatical point is illustrated; they are expected to infer the rule and then apply it in controlled exercises. No communicative, uncontrolled tasks are offered to allow learners to demonstrate what they have learned. Alif Baa and al-Kitaab: Unvowelled texts are introduced from the beginning, and in general, no focus is placed on grammatical case endings. Grammatical points are intro-duced in both texts gradually; sequencing is based on the evolution of the Maha/Khalid narrative, not on any particular research or predetermined design. Students are expected



to prepare grammar outside of class, leaving class time to be devoted to the activation of vocabulary and the development of speaking and listening skills. The authors note that the guiding principle in the series regarding grammar (and vocabulary) is “spiraling”: a concept is introduced more than once, each time with increasing detail. This means that learners may notice rules through gradual exposure, long before they are formally introduced. On the down side, this also means that gram-matical concepts are sometimes not clearly or thoroughly explained the first time around, and students must wait until the second or third exposure to get detailed information on a particular structure. For example, case endings are introduced with adverbs (les-son 5) and often appear in audio texts, but their grammatical function is not explained until the end of the book (lesson 16). In general, the method used is both inductive and deductive. Exercises are provided to allow students to notice and experience a grammatical structure before studying it explicitly. Then, students are exposed to it through listening and controlled and free pro-duction exercises that simultaneously promote accurate use of grammatical structures. But is such a method suitable for all types of learners? Ahlan wa Sahlan: Grammatical concepts are introduced from the easiest to the most complex. Although the authors employ techniques similar to the other two textbooks (in the letters and sounds), they move quickly to more in-depth treatments of various grammatical topics. For example, in lesson 1 of the student textbook, laysa (used for negating the nominal sentence in the present tense) is presented with all 14 possible pro-noun conjugations, which include the dual and feminine plural; subsequent exercises require students to reproduce all 14 forms. Additionally, grammatical case endings are featured in video dialogues. One wonders to what extent this is “functional” as opposed to “over-the-top.”

Diglossia. Volume I of al-Kitāb al-Asāsī does not address the issue of diglossia. Although the author presents daily life situations, the accompanying vocabulary is in fuṣħa. As a result, stu-dents may indirectly be led to believe that these language functions are conducted in this register. That said, Badawi has made an attempt to alleviate this disconnect somewhat by selecting fuṣħa words and structures that are frequently found in the spoken varieties, as opposed to selecting more archaic items. It might be worth considering to what extent the fact that this book is published in conjunction with the Arab League bears on the author’s decision to exclude any real treatment of the Arabic diglossic situation. The authors of the Ahlan wa Sahlan and the al-Kitaab series deal with diglossia very differently. Both address the fact that Arabic is characterized by diglossia, however in Ahlan wa Sahlan the authors do not go far beyond that. Formal Arabic is the primary mode of discourse throughout the book—even for situations like ordering tea and greet-ing friends. Unfortunately, this might lead students to believe that they would be able to function as well using this register in say, Syria, as they would in Egypt—while research (e.g., Badawi 1973) has shown that this is not the case. As the book notes, fuṣħa is the variety that is used invariably throughout the Arab world in specialized functions and formal situations—it is not the variety used in the street or at home for interpersonal



communication. Surely focusing only on the more formal aspects of the language for all situations contradicts the text’s claim that it “provides them [learners] with basic struc-tures and lexical knowledge that will enable them to function completely in Arabic.” In Alif Baa, third edition, Brustad, al-Batal, and al-Tonsi adopt a markedly different philosophy in the treatment of diglossia by reinforcing their claim that Arabic is one language with multiple varieties and treating formal Arabic equally with Egyptian and Levantine. Previously, dialect-related exercises existed as a supplement to the unit that was almost extraneous to the lesson and thus could be easily ignored (even if only for the sake of time) in favor of the formal Arabic content. This is still the case in al-Kitaab, Part 1, second edition , and it seems clear that for a brief period, at least, there is going to be some disconnect between the two stages—that is, until al-Kitaab, Part 1, third edition, is in full distribution.

Conclusion and General Remarks

Through the process of analysis and evaluation, we relied largely on our own chapter-by-chapter inspection of the books, personal experience as learners and teachers, and the introductions to both teachers and students. It became clear that there is some disagree-ment regarding the issues of authenticity and proficiency. Specifically, we found al-Kitāb al-Asāsi to be more form-focused and less communi-cative overall in comparison with the other two volumes. It relies heavily on the direct approach (i.e., the entire textbook is in the target language, with a focus on controlled production drills) and does not utilize tasks to activate student language use. It is less complex and less time-consuming for learners, and is less engaging. While the themes are “authentic,” the exercises are contrived and proficiency is ill-defined. The authors of the Ahlan wa Sahlan and the al-Kitaab series have taken a completely different approach—one geared specifically toward communicative and proficiency goals. However, what this means—to be equipped to deal with a native speaker—is arguably very different in each case. In the case of Ahlan wa Sahlan, Alosh and Clark have made great strides in updating the textbook making it more visually appealing to the adult learner and more user-friendly where grammar is concerned (through the use of charts and other visual elements). They also place a new focus on communicating in Arabic from the outset, but aim to develop functional speakers of one variety of Ara-bic––MSA. The authors of Alif Baa, on the other hand, pointedly expose students to other varieties from the start. Both Ahlan wa Sahlan and the al-Kitaab program also provide more complex and time-consuming—but more entertaining—tasks for learners. Although some authentic materials are used when dealing with MSA (for example, reading texts), other activities cannot be said to provide truly authentic communication, as they are expected to be conducted in a dialect that is not normally used for that particular purpose. Indeed, the issue of authenticity is problematic in designing ALM, as the ideological stance of a designer toward what might be thought to be “real Arabic” is often borne out in her or his selection of content. In other cases, the issue is simply ignored. This creates



problems when dealing with the four language skills together, because it raises the dan-ger of misrepresenting how each skill actually functions in the Arab world. The authors of today’s Arabic textbooks have taken an interest in the communicative approach and their designs often suggest, albeit indirectly, that in Arabic, the four skills are used equally by the native speaker (as they are in many Western and non-Western monoglossic lan-guages) Badawi (2002). Ideology is also a key factor in ALM designers’ definition of the goal of learning Arabic for nonnative speakers (Badawi 1985). Operating from an ideological standpoint (as opposed to a practical or research-driven perspective), they define the language-learning goal for nonnative speakers the same way they would for native speakers: to be able to communicate and be proficient in fuṣħa. However, these very different types of learners have very different backgrounds that must be taken into account (see table 6.1). At the start of our examination we asked: Do today’s ALM meet the needs of learn-ers who would like to function adequately in the Arab world? What trends in teaching and learning Arabic are apparent? Our analysis suggests that each of the three books is adequate for the general needs of nonnative learners, especially for academic and lit-erary use of the language, through their focus on certain skills and their treatment of vocabulary and grammar. However, how best to deal with spoken Arabic and how best to represent it in ALM is still an issue. For example, how might this affect the foreign learner’s comprehension of spoken Arabic by a native speaker? Even though Alif Baa, third edition, and al-Kitaab, Part 1, second edition introduce the spoken variety to some extent, in general all three texts tend to give the speaking of MSA a status equal to the reading, writing, and comprehension of MSA, without paying enough attention to the diglossic situation in the Arab world, according to Badawi (1985). Finally, our examination also identified the following trends in teaching and learn-ing Arabic that could shape the course of ALM design, adoption, and use; it is our hope that by bringing them to light, we might encourage the kind of professional introspec-tion that will lead to great advances in the field of ALM development. First, there is a tendency for many Arabic programs to adopt materials incongruent with their specific

Table 6.1

Arabic language in the diglossic community

Arabic Language consists of (A + B)A. Dialect B. fuṣħa

Arabic language model as presented in most of Arabic language materials

Pedagogical goal Learners’ backgroundfuṣħa Native Arab speakers

(a dialect)fuṣħa Non-Native speakers

(a foreign language)



(philosophical) goals or learners’ needs (assuming, of course, that each Arabic program has specific philosophical goals and actually undertakes periodic needs analysis); there is also a tendency to produce materials that seem to suit everyone’s needs. This raises the question: Is there such a thing as “one-size-fits-all” language materials? Second, there is an ongoing reliance on personal experience to develop ALM for the adult learner of Ara-bic. This reflects a dearth of knowledge of empirical studies on second language acqui-sition about Arabic that should be remedied. Third, there is a need for ALM featuring more personalized, flexible, and engaging content—and more respect for the learner. Fourth, there is a lack of quantitative research describing what the native Arabic speaker does when speaking, reading, writing, and listening; advances in this area would be very helpful to teachers and ALM designers. Fifth, the issue of authenticity deserves more attention. Many variables should be considered, such as how language is really used, what it means to be proficient, and the roles of artificially created texts and learner needs (See Walters, Alan (2009). Finally, it remains unclear: Do teachers and students actually use the texts as their authors intend? Perhaps we should find out if we are even hitting the mark at all (See Masuhara, Hitomi (1998).

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Dil Parkinson for allowing us to conduct this survey through Arabic-L listserv, and the many participants who so generously offered their time and comments.

Notes

1. This chapter is based on a panel presentation at the 2010 Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics on Arabic languages and linguistics. Since that time, there have been many developments in the field of ALM—perhaps most importantly, the release of al-Kitaab, Part 1, third edition—that was not reviewed for this chapter. It is our hope that the present paper might nevertheless serve as a framework for the evaluation of these and other materials. 2. Arabic-L is a mailing list for Arabic linguistics and Arabic language teaching, sponsored by Brigham Young University, the Arabic Linguistics Society, and the American Association of Teachers of Arabic.

References

Badawi, El-Said M. 1973. Mustawayāt al-‘Arabīyah al-mu’āṣirah fī Miṣr: baḥth fī ‘alāqat al-lughah bi-al-ḥaDārah. Cairo, Egypt: Dār al-Ma’ārif.

———. 1985. “Educated spoken Arabic: A problem in teaching Arabic as a foreign language.” In Scientific and Humanistic Dimensions of Language, edited by K. R. Jankowsky, 15–22. Phila-delphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.



———. 2002. “In the quest for the Level 4+ in Arabic: Training Level 2-3 learners in indepen-dent reading.” In Developing Professional-Level Language Proficiency, edited by Betty Lou Leaver and Boris Shekhtman, 156–76. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Eisele, John. 2006. “Developing frames of reference for assessment and curricular design in a diglossic L2: From skills to tasks (and back again).” In Handbook for Arabic Language Teach-ing Professionals in the 21st Century, edited by Kassem M. Wahba, Zeinab A. Taha, and Liz England, 197–220. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Masuhara, Hitomi. 1998. “What do teachers really want from coursebooks?” In Materials Devel-opment in Language Teaching, edited by Brian Tomlinson, 239–60. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Masuhara, Hitomi, Naeema Hann, Yong Yi, and Brian Tomlinson. 2008. “Adult EFL Courses.” ELT Journal 62(3): 294–312.

McDonough, Jo, and Christopher Shaw. 2003. Materials and Methods in ELT: A Teacher’s Guide. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

Nation, I. S. P. 2001. Learning Vocabulary in Another Language. Cambridge: Cambridge Univer-sity Press.

Ryding, Karin C. 1991. “Proficiency despite diglossia: A new approach for Arabic.” The Modern Language Journal 75(2): 212–18.

Sheldon, Leslie. 1988. “Evaluating ELT textbooks and materials.” ELT Journal 42(4): 237–46.Tomlinson, Brian, Bao Dat, Hitomi Masuhara, and Rani Rubdy. 2001. “Review of adult EFL

courses.” ELT Journal 55(1): 80–101.Waters, Alan. 2009. “Advances in materials design.” In The Handbook of Language Teaching, edited

by Michael H. Long and Catherine J. Doughty, 311–25. Chichester, UK:Wiley-Blackwell.



Al-ʾArabiyya, 46 (2013), 123–125

Ahmad Khorshid, an Arabic teacher with broad experience, has composed an enor-mously useful set of pedagogical materials in his series of four Arabic readers, Sahlawayhi (named, he says, after the younger brother of the renowned 3rd/8th-century grammar-ian of Arabic Sībawayhi!). The series presents graded stories for adult learners of Arabic as a foreign language. The stories increase in length and complexity of language over the four volumes, with the first story containing a mere 200 vocabulary words and the last twice that. The aim is to introduce a large volume of vocabulary in context and to recycle it through increasingly sophisticated written structure as the stories progress. The stories themselves are all the composition of the author, and most involve plot lines about young people of college age or slightly older just beginning their lives after college. Most of the protagonists of the stories are Westerners, an exception is the very first in the series, which is a realistic tale about a young Egyptian man entrenched in an unpromising career as a schoolteacher, having to work two jobs to make ends meet while supporting his wife and five small children. He decides to emigrate illegally to seek work in Europe in order to build a better life for himself and his family. What follows is a har-rowing and all-too-real tale of desperate young Arab and African men crossing the Medi-terranean crammed into small, open boats, often never reaching their cherished goal, instead dying in the attempt to realize it. Happily, our hero does not die, but some of his traveling companions do. Of those who survive, many are rounded up by the police as they swim to the Spanish mainland after being forced to abandon their flimsy craft to the

Review of Sahlawayhi 1

Graded Stories for Beginners

Ahmad Khorshid


124 AHMAD KHORSHID

waves, fortunately, within sight of land. Our hero escapes death and the police and lives the life of a migrant worker in Spain. This might have set the tone for the volume, but the second tale is a story of a young American studying Arabic in Egypt who stumbles into a fantasyland of ancient Egyp-tian kings and queens. The third story is about a group of Western students of Arabic at Qatar University who plan an outing into the desert, where, when their bus breaks down, they are rescued by a group of Bedouin and spend the night in camp as the guests of the sheikh. The fourth and last story in book 1 is about a trip from France to Thailand undertaken by a young Frenchman. Indeed, the focus upon young Westerners, while understandable from the point of view of engaging students in stories about people similar to themselves, is the single aspect of the book that I would have liked to see done differently. I had preferred that the stories continue from their promising beginning to address topics that animate young people of the Arab world. This, however, does not otherwise detract from the pedagogical utility of the series, and it certainly does not appear to diminish students’ enjoyment of the texts. Students find great encouragement in their ability to follow complete stories of between 12 to 16 pages in length and to be able to master most of the details. To assist them in this are extensive multilingual vocabulary lists at the back of each story, with glosses of all new words in the texts listed in English, French, German, and Spanish. It scarcely bears men-tioning that this alone renders the books quite suitable for use in Arabic study-abroad programs (where, as it happens, I use them). So, too, is each story complete with a series of comprehension exercises that can be assigned along with the readings. This has the great advantage of ensuring that students actually read the stories in their entirety, as the exercises can be assigned as homework to be handed in. Needless to say, another way to check that students are reading is to conduct discussions in class, something to which these stories are especially well adapted. Nevertheless, clever students (or those enjoy-ing the famous nightlife of Beirut at the expense of their studies) can finesse a class dis-cussion while having slacked off on their reading. The stories are so eminently accessible to students, that class discussions can be very lively, with even more reticent students joining in. The story of the visit to the Qatari desert lends itself particularly well to class activities because students can act out all or segments of the story, with some playing the role of the Bedouin and others adopting the part of the students (think in terms of planning the trip, arranging for the bus, meeting the Bedouin, exchanging niceties with the sheikh and his entourage). In a program that offers or emphasizes the spoken language alongside the written, this provides a chance for students who wish to engage in conversation in the language usually employed in writing to exercise their conversational skills in that medium by suspending belief and entertaining the fiction that the Bedouin actually do speak fuṣḥā, playing their roles accordingly by declaiming in that variety of the language. Discussions, of course, may be carried out in either variety or in a mixture of the two, the last lending an added measure of realism to the proceedings. In my experience with the materials, I have found that student reactions to the sto-ries have always been favorable. They typically comment that the level of the stories and the constantly recycled vocabulary build confidence, and that they enjoy being able to


Review of Sahlawayhi 1 125

follow a plot in Arabic and discuss it in detail in class. About the levels, author Khor-shid has conceived of book 1 as being appropriate for beginning students, and he has apparently implemented it at that level in his own teaching. I am of the opinion that the books are more appropriate for the lower intermediate level and above. The first story in book 1, for example, begins right away with dual forms. Such matters can, of course, be addressed at any level, but it does no harm to wait until students have reached such points in their main textbook before asking them to read stories exhibiting the struc-tures they are studying formally. Moreover, beginning students find it a challenge to read even short texts with understanding, and the shortest of the texts in Sahlawayhi runs to 12 pages. Such assessments are best left to teachers who know the capabilities of their stu-dents. At whatever level, the Sahlawayhi series is a highly desirable set of materials for teachers to have in their materials cabinet. The series and a companion set of grammar books can be obtained easily and at a very reasonable cost at www .createspace .com.

—David Wilmsen



Al-ʾArabiyya, 46 (2013), 127–133

Introduction

The foreword to Key Features and Parameters in Arabic Grammar highlights two central aspects of this contribution to modern linguistic theory: The fact that the language stud-ied is Arabic, and the fact that the approach taken relies on “the most recent develop-ments in generative theory” (xv). The author points out that while valuable studies of various themes and issues in Arabic grammar from within the generative tradition do exist, many aspects of Arabic grammar remain understudied. In that sense, the book addresses an important lacuna in the field. The language that is the main focus of study in the volume is Modern Standard Ara-bic. Data from colloquial varieties and other languages are sometimes brought to bear on the discussion of syntactic variation. While I will not dwell on the choice made by the author, I will note the difficulty in obtaining the grammatical judgments necessary for a generative approach to the syntax of Modern Standard Arabic. The reader might acknowledge, along with the author, the importance of Modern Standard Arabic as a national and official language in twenty-two Arab states, as well as its global status result-ing from its increased presence in social media and on the Internet. The availability of sizeable electronic corpora, the author adds, provides the researcher with “more modern and reliable data” (xvi). However, corpora, no matter how rich they are, do not provide the necessary “negative” evidence, and reliance on native speaker judgments remains a key source of data for the generative grammarian. A related and important concern for

Review of

Key Features and Parameters in Arabic Grammar

Abdelkader Fassi Fehri


128 ABDELKADER FASSI FEHRI

the reader is thus the difficulty of interpreting the unacceptability of some of the cited examples in the book. For instance, on page 21, the author notes the importance of the telic/atelic distinction in Modern Standard Arabic. Using a well-known test for distin-guishing telic and atelic predicates, the author provides example (39b) (repeated here as (1)), as an illustration of an atelic predicate in Modern Standard Arabic.

(1) šariba-a l-xamr-a saaʕat-an (*fii saaʕat-in)drank-3 the-wine-acc hour-acc (*in hour-gen)“He drank wine for an hour (*in an hour).”

A Google search reveals that the equivalent of the unacceptable version of (1) does occur in the large electronic corpora currently available in Modern Standard Arabic, as illustrated in the two examples in (2).

(2) a. ʔumarrir-u l-kaʔs-a ʔila l-bunayyat-i llatipass-1 the-glass-acc to the-girl-gen thatšarib-at-hu fii ʕušr-i θ-θaaniyadrank-3f-it in tenth-gen the-second“I pass the glass to the girl who drank it in a tenth of a second.”

(alhan -note .blogspot .com)

b. šarib-a l-ʕaSir-a fii xams-i daqaaʔiq-indrank-3 the-juice-acc in five-gen minutes-gen“He drank the juice in five minutes.”

(www .mawhiba .org)

One cannot simply attribute the contrast observed between (1) and (2) to a possible diversity in native speaker judgments without further study. Such contrasts thus point to the need for a serious discussion of what is meant by “native speaker judgment” in the context of Modern Standard Arabic.

Contents

The book is divided into three parts, each one dealing with an important sentential con-stituent. It includes eleven chapters, two of which––namely, chapters 5 and 9––have not been published elsewhere. Part 1 consists of chapters 1 through 4 and deals with the event structure within the Arabic sentence, including issues of tense, aspect, and voice. Part 2 consists of chapters 5 through 8 and its focus of inquiry is the syntax and interpre-tation of noun phrases. Part 3, which includes chapters 9 through 11, deals mainly with clausal architecture, and more specifically, with ways of anchoring clauses in discourse. Theoretical discussions, which involve the nature of parameters in syntactic variation as well as the architecture of the grammar, are weaved into the various chapters of the book. Number theory, for instance, and the different types of plurality, including verbal


Key Features and Parameters in Arabic Grammar 129

plurality, are taken up in chapters 2 and 11, in the context of discussing the meaning and function of verbal morphology and the architectural parallels between nominal and ver-bal syntax. Chapter 7 discusses crosslinguistic variation in the syntax of the noun phrase in Arabic, English, and Romance, and the nature of the parameters responsible for this observed diversity. The decision to distribute theoretical discussions across the book assumes that the reader has a good grasp of the theoretical framework outside of those discussions and is familiar with the theoretical debates on which the Arabic data weighs in. Herein lies one of the difficulties of this text. Chapter 1 argues against the commonly held opinion among traditional grammar-ians that Modern Standard Arabic lacks grammatical tense. To begin with, the author coins two terms, “ST (= suffixed tense)” and “PT (= prefixed tense),” as neutral terms to refer to the two contrasting forms that a verb might take, based on the placement of the person morpheme in the verbal stem. The co-occurrence of time reference adverbials with ST is taken as evidence that ST primarily expresses past/perfect tense. Similarly, PT is shown to express primarily present/imperfect tense. Aspectual characteristics are associated with the verbal forms via tense. Thus, ST is always interpreted as perfective and PT is strongly associated with imperfective. The chapter ends with a brief discussion of a typology of languages based on whether they grammaticalize aspect and/or tense. Chapter 4 pushes the investigation into the properties of the perfect in Modern Standard Arabic further. First, we observe what the author calls “the polyfunctionality of T/Asp forms” (94). With respect to ST, this means that the same verb form can func-tion as “a temporally finite verb” (94) expressing a simple past tense and a “participle” (94) expressing the various meanings of the perfect. The distribution of the particle qad is used as a diagnostic to identify the perfect interpretation of ST. This chapter also explores the behavior and distribution of munðu and other adverbials in order to iden-tify the different readings associated with ST. While the discussion in chapters 1 and 4 clarifies the strong connection between tense and aspect in Modern Standard Arabic, it is confusing to see that the author refers to the perfective and imperfective sometimes as aspects, as clearly illustrated in the structure given on page 4 (and repeated here), and sometimes, as tenses, as in “munðu-d excludes perfective tenses” (117).

(3) T1 (± past)T2 (± Perfect/Anterior)

Asp (± Perfective/Terminative)

VP (± Telic)

Chapters 2 and 11 offer a fine-grained analysis of plurality, both verbal and nomi-nal. Chapter 2 argues that verbal plurality is the source of both transitivity/causativity and iterative/intensive meanings of events. Thus, the occurrence of the plural morpheme on a verbal head can be interpreted collectively, yielding an iterative or intensive event (e.g. kassara “break”), or it can be interpreted distributively, yielding a transitive verb



(e.g. ʕaððama “make-important”). The analysis developed in this chapter is supported by crosslinguistic evidence for a tight relation between transitivity/causativity and iterative/intensive meanings. This is illustrated in Turkish, for example, where a given verbal form can either have a causative or intensive/iterative interpretation in the same context. The chapter also includes a discussion of reduplication as an overt realization of a plural mor-pheme both in Arabic and other languages. Fassi Fehri further shows how this leads to a unification of plural morphology across the verbal and nominal domains in Arabic. Even though chapter 11 is included in part III of the book, I discuss it here since it revisits the syntax of verbal and nominal plurality and investigates the important differences between them. In the nominal domain, plural can be associated with any category: It can be a fea-ture on the Num(ber) head or projected as a modifier (or adjunct) to any other category in the structure of the noun phrase. The different levels at which the plural feature is real-ized within the nominal structure explain the distinct properties of plural nouns. To illustrate, under the intensive reading, a plural noun like ʔaqaawiil “a lot of say-ings” includes a double realization of the plural feature, once under the Num head, and the second one as an adjunct to the Num(ber) P(hrase). Despite its formal similarity with nominal plurality, which was observed in chapter 2, verbal plurality functions dif-ferently. Nominal plurality can be “externally interpreted” (326), in the sense that when it is realized at the highest structural level in a noun phrase, it can dictate agreement on the verb. That is not the case for verbal plurality, which is “more transparently interpreted at the internal level” (327). The link Fassi Fehri establishes between reciprocity and plu-rality illustrates that; for example, the long vowel [aa] in morphological reciprocals like tamaazaħa “they shared joking with each other” is analyzed as the realization of verbal plurality at the level of the verbal root. Chapter 3 examines synthesis and analysis in the expression of voice and tempo-rality in Arabic and other languages. One of the main arguments put forth here is that formal complexity plays a determining role in creating analytic forms. For instance, the Subject/Object Agreement split is argued to cause a verbal split into an auxiliary and a thematic verb in order to support separately the two different agreement morphemes. In Arabic, verbal auxiliaries play a role in the realization of complex temporality. Varia-tion between languages is attributed to the nominal or verbal nature of the auxiliary in a given language leading to the bundled parameter in (48), repeated here.

Splitting Analysisa. Split Agr into finite Agr1 and nonfinite Agr2 if Aux is of nominal nature.b. Split the T chain into T1 and T2 if Aux is verbal.c. Split a finite Agr/T chain into a finite Agr/T1 and non-finite Agr/T2

(and attach Pass to non-finite Agr/T2).

Part II of the book begins with chapter 5, where it is shown that general nouns, a category of nouns like samak “fish” in Arabic, miscategorized in the literature as either mass or collective, in fact motivate a new grammar of countability. One important piece of evidence comes from the fact that, in some contexts, general nouns behave like mass nouns, and in others they behave like count nouns. The analysis offered tries to account



for this mixed behavior of general nouns in terms of two new syntactic features, atomi-city and singulativity. According to this characterization, general nouns are neutral with respect to both features, that is, they are [Ø atomic] and [Ø singulative]. In addition, the analysis differentiates between count and mass nouns according to whether they project a Cl(assifier) P(hrase): count nouns project a ClP, whereas mass nouns generally lack a ClP. The plural feature is orthogonal to the count/mass distinction, and it is projected as the head of Num(ber) P(hrase). Num heads the projection of count nouns, but it is a modifier adjunct in the case of mass nouns. General nouns project the same structure as count nouns but differ with respect to atomicity and singulativity, since count nouns are [+ atomic] and [+ singulative]. Chapter 6 tackles one of the most well-studied constructions in Arabic and Semitic in general, the construct state (CS), or synthetic possession within the noun phrase. The author presents and illustrates four properties that have been associated with this construction: (a) the merger of the article with the noun, (b) which is paralleled by the merger between the possessor and the head noun in a synthetic noun phrase. A similar form of merger can be observed among quantifiers, numerals, superlatives, partitives, and any other pre-nominal modifier, and the following head noun (c). Finally, (d) it is observed that adjectives follow the possessor in a CS noun, whereas they precede it in an analytic noun phrase. The contribution this chapter makes to the wealth of studies on the CS lies in correlating property (d) to the other three, thus making adjective place-ment a core characteristic of synthetic noun phrases. The examination of the syntax and interpretation of adjectives leads the author to propose the following noun phrase archi-tecture (87) and is repeated here.

(4) DP > AGRP (PossP) > nP > AP* > NP

The various possible and observed word orders are obtained by “roll up movement” (169) of the head N. The investigation of the syntax and interpretation of Arabic bare nouns (BNs), in comparison with their counterparts in English and Romance languages, leads to the formulation of two parameters, including the Indefinite Gen(eric) Parameter, in chapter 7. An important generalization concerning the readings associated with Arabic BNs is established first: Arabic BNs are interpreted as “(a) Ex[istential] with stage level predi-cates, and (b) Gen[eric] with habitual aspect or generality adverbs” (187). In that sense, Arabic BNs contrast with English BNs, but they parallel English and Romance overt indefinites. This important generalization is accounted for using the newly introduced parameter Indefinite Gen Parameter ([42] is repeated here as [5]).

(5) Indefinite Gen ParameterIndefinite Gen is either (a) realized (as a functional head) or (b) N moves to Gen.

Fassi Fehri introduces a new projection, namely GenP, in the architecture of the noun phrase. GenP is headed by a in English or un in French, but Ø in Arabic. Therefore, the



structure of overt indefinites in English and Romance fall under the variant (a) of the Indefinite Gen Parameter, whereas Arabic BNs fall under the variant in (b). The N-to-Gen movement is similar to the N-to-D computational process observed in Arabic CS. Chapter 8, which concludes part II of the book, looks at innovation across various Semitic languages, using the methodology of parametric comparative linguistics. The object of inquiry is the Semitic nominal domain, revisiting some of its well-known char-acteristics, like demonstrative and adjective placement, determination, and the realiza-tion of (in)definiteness in various contexts. The chapter argues for a split-DP system, with each DP layer instantiating one binary feature, as in (76), repeated here.

(6) DP (Pers/Def) > DP (Indiv/Indef) > NumP > ClP > np

The person and individuation features are the grammatical realizations of definiteness and indefiniteness within the nominal domain. While definite noun phrases are associated with the person feature, indefinite noun phrases lack person specification. Both definite and indefinite noun phrases are associated with the individuation feature. In part III, the focus shifts to the clausal level and more specifically to the elements that anchor sentences in discourse, such as temporality, finiteness, and pronouns. In chapter 9, the question of whether Arabic is a double access reading language arises. The complementizer phrase (CP) is shown to be the domain of interpretation of double access construals of tense and pronouns. Fassi Fehri argues that double access readings in Arabic cannot be accounted for simply by the cartographic structure of the left periph-ery, which calls for a split of CP into various components, because logophoricity in the Arabic complementizer only partially overlaps with rootness. Chapter 10 revisits the syntax of null subjects in Arabic under a minimalist probe-goal framework. Fassi Fehri initially clarifies that Arabic null subjects are tied to a “rich” finite inflection on the verb and they are almost always referential. Generic or arbitrary null subjects appear only in passive sentences. The probe-goal implementation of the analysis depends crucially on the feature Person and its licensing: referential null subjects, which are endowed with the Person feature, are merged in the specifier of inflection, where they value the Person feature. This also accounts for the fact that inflection realizes the features of the null sub-ject it agrees with. Generic or arbitrary null subjects, which have a Ø specification for the feature Person, are merged in the specifier of the voice phrase, which is also marked as Ø for the Person feature in the context of passive sentences. In addition to dealing with Arabic grammar from a generative perspective, this book takes a step toward bridging the gap between three distinct approaches to Arabic gram-mar: In a move that also characterizes his earlier work, Fassi Fehri integrates important results reached in modern linguistic theory with those of the early Arabist tradition and the rich Western Orientalist grammars. My final remarks concern the overall organization of this volume, which consists of a collection of articles and papers written at different times for different audiences. With careful editing, potential redundancies and inconsistencies that result from such a compilation could have been eliminated. Unfortunately, that was not the case here. Apart from the overlaps one finds between chapters, there is a lack of uniformity in the



use of acronyms. For example, in chapter 1, ST and PT are coined as neutral terms to refer to two contrasting verbal forms, but those acronyms are not used in the rest of the book; in chapter 4, the author resorts to PAST and PRESENT instead. More important, the assumed structures in the theoretical framework are not unified. For instance, the basic architecture of the DP given in chapter 6 includes an agreement phrase (5), a rem-nant of an earlier version of the Minimalist Program, which no longer appears in the DP structure provided in chapter 8 (6). In the latter, the structure includes instead, a NumP and a ClP, which dominate np and were argued to be part of the nominal domain in chapter 5. Finally, some inconsistencies arise that compromise the coherence of the vol-ume. One of them, which concerns the categorization of perfective and imperfective as tense or aspect, was pointed out earlier. Another example is when Fassi Fehri dismisses in chapter 4 the test he uses in chapter 1 to show that Arabic has grammatical tense. Those kinds of details contribute to the difficulty of the book, especially for readers who are not closely familiar with the theoretical framework. Nevertheless, Fassi Fehri offers in this book a wealth of data about Arabic; he contributes an important source that could spark future research. His book is timely given current theoretical discussions in genera-tive grammar and is an important reference for any generative syntactician.

—Lina Chouieri



135

Mohammad T. Alhawary is associate professor of Arabic linguistics and second lan-guage acquisition at the University of Michigan, where he teaches courses on both Arabic language and Arabic theoretical and applied linguistics. He received his PhD from Georgetown University and has published numerous articles, book chapters, and reviews on Arabic linguistics and second language acquisition. His most recent publica-tions include Arabic Second Language Acquisition of Morphosyntax (Yale University Press, 2009) and Modern Standard Arabic Grammar: A Learner’s Guide (Wiley-Blackwell, 2011).

Dalal Abo El Seoud is a senior Arabic language instructor at the Arabic Language Insti-tute at the American University in Cairo. She received her TAFL from AUC in 1994. Her thesis “Collocations in Vocabulary Teaching” was translated and published. Her PhD is from Ain Shams University (2003) and her dissertation is titled, “The Effect of an Inte-grated Approach on the Development of Oral Skills.” She is also a coauthor of The Con-cise Arabic–English Lexicon of Verbs in Context (American University in Cairo Press, 2011) as well as Uktub al ‘Arabiyya: Advanced Writing Skills in Modern Standard Arabic (American University in Cairo Press, 2012), for elementary and advanced-level writers. Her research interests fall within areas of teaching methods and language acquisition.

Aja Q. Chaker is a doctoral candidate in the Department of Arabic at Georgetown Uni-versity. She puts her experience as a nonnative speaker of Arabic to use in the classroom, having taught Intensive Arabic at Georgetown and elsewhere for more than five years. Her interest in understanding the experiences of Arabic learners is highlighted in her research as well, from papers dealing with Arabic study-abroad experiences to her dis-sertation research, which focuses on identity, language policy, and politics in Algeria.

Lina Choueiri currently teaches linguistics at the American University of Beirut, in Lebanon. She received her PhD in linguistics in 2002 from the University of South-ern California. Her research interests center on the comparative study of the syntax of Arabic dialects from within the broad theoretical framework of generative grammar. She researches topics such as long distance A’-dependencies, possession in noun phrases and in sentences, and their implications for the theory of grammar. Her most recent publica-tions include The Syntax of Arabic (Cambridge University Press, 2010) coauthored with Joseph Aoun and Elabbas Benmamoun, and “Indefiniteness spread in construct state

Contributor Information


136 Contributors

nominals and the case of the missing determiner,” a chapter in Current Issues in Mediter-ranean Syntax, in press with Brill Academic Publishers.

Raghda El Essawi is an assistant professor and the director of the masters program of Teaching Arabic as a Foreign Language at the American University in Cairo. She earned her PhD in Methods of Teaching Foreign Languages from Al-Azhar University in Cairo, Egypt. El Essawi’s research and teaching interests include second language pedagogy, second language acquisition, and second language teacher training. Her two most recent publications are a book titled تدريس الكتابة: رؤية ومنهج, published by Dar Al-Salam, and “Arabic in Latin script in Egypt: Who uses it and why?” which appears in Global English–Issues of Language, Culture, and Identity, published by Peter Lang AG. She is currently involved in a project that aims at developing software for enhancing the use of Arabic connectors in AFL learners’ written texts.

Wafaa Kamel Fayed is a professor of linguistics within the Arabic Department at Fac-ulty of Arts at Cairo University. She is a correspondent member at Arabic Language Academy in Damascus. She received her PhD in linguistics from Faculty of Arts, Cairo University. Her research interests are lexicography, morphophonemics, morphology, sociolinguistics, and phonotactics. Her recent publications include Westernization Phe-nomenon of Commercial Names in Some Capitals of Eastern Arab Countries (Arabic Lan-guage Academy of Damascus 2005), Specialized Arabic Dictionaries between Classic and Contemporary: Dictionary of Contemporary Idioms as a Model (Islamic University 2011), Arabic–English Code-Switching: Variables of Work and Education (Berlin Free University 2012), Morphological Form and Sound Features: A Study of the Tri-Radical Geminated Verb (ʕaalam al-Kutub 2001), Researches on Contemporary Arabic (ʕaalam al-Kutub 2003), Arabic Academies and Language Issues (ʕaalam al-Kutub 2004), and Dictionary of Idioms of Contemporary Arabic (Abul Hoal,2007).

Mona Kamel Hassan is a senior Arabic language instructor at the Arabic Language Insti-tute of the American University in Cairo. She got her master’s degree in Teaching Arabic as a Foreign Language from the American University in Cairo in 1994. She received her PhD in linguistics from the English Department at the Faculty of Arts, Helwan Univer-sity in 2005. Her research centers on her participation in different international confer-ences on foreign language learning and teaching. More broadly, her research areas of interest are sociolinguistics, pragmatics, and methods of teaching foreign languages.

Muhammad al-Sharkawi graduated from Ain Shams University in Cairo in 1993. He obtained a master’s degree in teaching Arabic as a foreign language. He received a PhD in Arabic linguistics in 2005 from Radboud University in the Netherlands. He has taught Arabic and linguistics in Bayreuth University in Germany, The American University in Cairo, Brown University, and Wayne State University in the United States. He has pub-lished extensively on the history of Arabic and its development. Among his publications are The Ecology of Arabic (Brill 2010) and Arabicization in the First Century of the Islamic Era. In addition, he has translated several books on linguistics from English to Arabic.


Contributors 137

Kassem M. Wahba is currently a visiting associate professor in the Department of Ara-bic at Georgetown University. He has taught Arabic to learners around the world, and has published several articles on teaching Arabic as a foreign language, Arabic linguistics, and dialectology. His publications include an edited book, A Handbook for Arabic Lan-guage Teaching Professionals in the 21stCentury, with Liz England and Zeinab Taha (Law-rence Erlbaum Associates 2006); an article in The Encyclopedia of Arabic Language and Linguistics (Brill 2006) on “Teaching Arabic as a first language at the primary, prepara-tory, and secondary schools in the Arab world;” an article on sociolinguistics in Under-standing Arabic: Essays in the Honor of El-Said Badawi (American University at Cairo 1996); and a paper on Egyptian Arabic and dialect variations, coauthored with Cath-erine Miller, presented at the Japan Association for Middle East Studies and published in the Journal of JAMES (1997).

David Wilmsen holds a PhD in Arabic language and linguistics from the University of Michigan and is associate professor of Arabic at The American University of Beirut. Interested in the historical development of and grammaticalization in the Arabic dia-lects, he has published a series of articles on the Arabic nota accusativi, or object pro-noun, iyyā-, and has recently turned his attention toward and is completing a book on a historical accounting of indefinite determiners, interrogatives, and negators built upon –š in Arabic dialects.



139

AATA appreciates the commitment of its institutional members to Arabic teaching and learning:

Ali Baba International CenterArab American Language Institute in Morocco (AALIM)Brigham Young UniversityCalifornia University of Pennsylvania Online Arabic B.A. ProgramGeorgetown UniversityGood Tree AcademyHedayet Institute for Arabic Studies in CairoQalam Wa Lawh Arabic Language Center, Rabat, MoroccoStanford UniversitySwarthmore CollegeUniversity of OregonUniversity of Southern California Middle East Studies Program

AATA Institutional Members



Documents

The Development of the Dual Paradigm in Arabic