Arabic-L:PEDA:Colloquial First

[Dilworth Parkinson]

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arabic-L: Wed 18 Jul 2007
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:Colloquial First (Intermediate Approach)
2) Subject:Colloquial First (Integrated Program)
3) Subject:Colloquial First (Research and Experience)

-------------------------Messages-----------------------------------
1)
Date: 18 Jul 2007
From:Waheed Samy <wasamy at umich.edu>
Subject:Colloquial First (Intermediate Approach)

I think it is important to consider that there is an intermediate  
approach (thus mirroring the language situation itself).  For  
example, in an MSA curriculum, there is plenty of room to introduce  
'non-MSA'.  In linguistic terms one could introduce simple  
phonological contrasts between the MSA dipthongs /ai/ and /aw/ and  
show their corresponding equivalents /ee/ and /oo/ in 'non-MSA'.   
Similarly one would take aspects from morphological, syntactic, and  
lexical, features, including mixtures thereof, and introduce these  
during the course of instruction.  For example, it would be useful  
for learners to know the MSA definite article 'al as well as the 'non- 
MSA' one 'il, and that the many relative pronouns in MSA are all  
equivalent to 'illi, and so on.

Waheed

------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
--
2)
Date: 18 Jul 2007
From:Munther Younes <may2 at cornell.edu>
Subject:Colloquial First (Integrated Program)

For the past 16 years, we have been following an "integrated"  
approach to teaching Arabic at Cornell University. According to this  
approach, classroom teaching and the textbooks used reflect the  
sociolinguistic realities of Arabic. MSA is introduced for reading  
and writing purposes, while colloquial Levantine is used for informal  
conversation and discussion of all kinds,  including discussion of  
MSA materials. The instructors of the program find this approach  
quite effective, natural, and easy to follow, since they converse in  
a variety of the language that is actually used for conversation and  
they read and write the variety of Arabic that is used for those  
functions.

My observations of instructors in other programs, where MSA is used  
for conversation, is that teachers are more comfortable speaking  
English than Arabic with their students. This is only natural,  
because English is a naturally spoken language, while MSA is not. I,  
as an Arab, find it silly and completely unnatural to ask my students  
in Fusha about what they did over the weekend. I think that my  
colleagues who are native speakers of Arabic would agree with me that  
it is more natural to ask a student "ween ruHt yoom issabt" and  
"Where did you go Saturday" than "?ayna dhahabta yawma ssabti"?

A lot of teachers are horrified at the idea of "contaminating" Fusha,  
the language of literature, culture, and Arab glory and unity, with  
the despised dialect in the classroom. Not much can be done about  
this attitude (although much can be said about it). Other teachers  
are worried about the confusion that might result from introducing  
the two varieties simultaneously. Our experience at Cornell  
demonstrates that most of this worry is the result of teacher biases,  
misinformed and untested assumptions.

The goal of the majority of our students is to understand, speak,  
read, and write Arabic the way the language is used in real life. We  
betray them when we insist on teaching it the way we think it should  
be used, which is the result of a poor understanding of the way human  
languages really work. Arabs dream of seeing Fusha as the only  
language variety that is used by Arabs everywhere and all the time,  
and they wish that the dialects would simply vanish.  We as teachers  
should be able to dream and wish as much as we want, but our wishes  
and dreams should not determine the approach we take in our efforts  
to serve our students to the best of our abilities.

If anyone is interested in learning more about our integrated  
program, I'll be happy to share more of our experiences.

Munther Younes
Director of the Arabic Program
Cornell University

------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
--
3)
Date: 18 Jul 2007
From:M"Jeremy Palmer" <jeremy.palmer at gmail.com>
Subject:Colloquial First (Research and Experience)

Yes, John Joseph Colangelo can base his comments on personal experience.
Personal experience is wonderful. It leads to ideas and questions. My  
simple
hope is that the field of Arabic SLA will publish (including  
reduplicated
studies) a large body of research regarding the positives and  
negatives of
learning and teaching colloquial Arabic. Everyone has personal  
experience
that is valuable and important for this issue. Perhaps when there is  
a large
body of research about this topic we will be able to identify trends and
practices that will allow us to make wise decisions in our curricula?  
Such
is my hope. Good luck to all.

Jeremy

------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
--
End of Arabic-L:  18 Jul 2007