Arabic-L:PEDA:What to call dialect class response

[Dilworth Parkinson]

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arabic-L: Fri 09 Jun 2006
Moderator: Dilworth Parkinson <dilworth_parkinson at byu.edu>
[To post messages to the list, send them to arabic-l at byu.edu]
[To unsubscribe, send message from same address you subscribed from to
listserv at byu.edu with first line reading:
            unsubscribe arabic-l                                      ]

-------------------------Directory------------------------------------

1) Subject:What to call dialect class response

-------------------------Messages-----------------------------------
1)
Date: 09 Jun 2006
From:srpkole at EUnet.yu
Subject:What to call dialect class response

Some 50 years ago it was quite normal to name fuSHa Arabic (further:  
MSA)
"the proper Arabic language". But not today, I reckon. At that time the
misconception that there are a proper language and improper spoken  
idioms
was widespread. Children all over the world had been still taught  
that the
written, or literary, or standard language is "the pure language",  
while the
spoken idioms are, consequently, "vulgar", "impure" and, going further,
"dirty" forms of that same language. I suppose that no nation on this  
planet
suffered more than the Arabs from that popular delusion.

(Besides, "standard language" shouldn't be used too lightly, for it  
has not
been scientifically and fully standardized yet in many cultures, like
Serbian, for example.)

So we should forgive the Russian guy from Mahmoud Elsayess' story his
unpretentious defense when he said he knew only "the proper Arabic
language". Besides, he was an alien who obviously studied Arabic at
university. The host at the radio station knew fairly well that even  
Arabs
from some other Arab countries cannot speak (or even thoroughly  
understand)
his Egyptian dialect, let alone the foreigners, who normally learn  
MSA. I
agree with Mahmoud that he therefore was obliged to address the guest  
in MSA
first.

However, this does not mean that MSA is the only "proper" Arabic,  
whatever
the islamic dogma and ideology of pan-arabism say. Today everybody knows
that, from the linguistic point of view, there is no essential  
difference
between an "official" dialect and a spoken idiom used by what is  
called the
ordinary people. We joke and say that a language is but a dialect  
which has
got the army and bureaucracy, or that a dialect is nothing but a  
language
which has failed politically, but it is much more serious than it  
appears at
first sight. I myself draw back every time at hearing "proper  
language" for
a written idiom (that is mostly the reason I'm writing these lines). So
should feel Mahmoud, for his only mother tongue is - I presume - an  
Arabic
spoken idiom, not the "formal Arabic language", which he first met at
school, or, at best, a little before that, listening to the prayers  
of his
elders or to the classical poetry. But the tales his grandma used to  
tell
him when he was a little boy were all in the spoken dialect, no  
doubt. And
they were told in quite a proper language, too. The only proper  
language for
that.

A spoken idiom is not a slang, first of all. It is much wider and far  
more
essential. Neither is it so easy to pick up a spoken Arab idiom later  
on,
after years of studying only MSA, as Mahmoud believes, perhaps  
because he is
a native speaker of one. As a non-Arab, I had to struggle for a long  
time to
pick up my first spoken idiom in Arabic, and it was all after 4 years of
hard work at a European university where only MSA was taught in a  
rigid way.

In that connection I would like to question Mahmoud's advice. He says
"simply focus on MSA". I think we had enough of such simple focusing.  
Tens
of thousands of people in the world studied Arabic during, let us  
say, the
last 50 years. Those who can prove that they managed to reach a high  
level in
reading, writing, understanding and speaking it fluently (speaking what?
both MSA and a dialect? Or more than one?), can be measured by  
hundreds at
best. Why is it so, if so? Isn't it high time to ask ourselves about it?
Isn't there something wrong with the system of the studies where MSA  
is the
only object in the focus? By this I don't mean to deny that teaching
students only one dialect would be still worse. Insofar I also agree  
with
Mahmoud.

In my opinion only "the total approach" can be completely fruitful. This
means starting the fuSHa and a spoken idiom at a time and study them  
both
from the very beginning. It seems to me that all the other approaches  
have
already proved unsuccessful.

Best,
Srpko Lestaric

------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
--
End of Arabic-L:  09 Jun 2006