The Impact of Arabic Diglossia on L2 Learners Studying in Iraq: the Difficulties Encountered and the Appropriate Arabic Approach to Teach

The main purpose of this research paper is to explore and assess the challenges and difficulties facing L2 learners of Arabic due to the diglossic situation in the Arab world and whether to learn both codes, standard and dialectal or one of them. The study also tries to understand the nature of the awareness and motivation of L2 learners about the Arabic diglossic situation in Iraq. Therefore, the procedure followed to achieve this assignment highly based on, and thoroughly examined, enormous references, verified and analyzed some statistical procedures previously used by other scholars related to diglossia along with the debate sessions held with some native teachers of Arabic as a Foreign language who have taught and still teaching this language to non-native speakers. The originality of the study lies in the invaluable information gained, through the discussion sessions as well as interviews held with these well-experienced teachers and students which definitely added a significant depth to the findings of this study. Further, the study has presented and discussed the perspectives of some scholars, who are prominent in the field of sociolinguistics, as well. This really reflects the practical objective implications of the study teachers. Eventually, the findings reveal that teaching/learning Arabic as a foreign language is not an easy task due to the diglossic situation in the Arab World.

It is highly believed that Arabic diglossia is a major factor of difficulty for learners, whether natives or Foreigners, in the educational and academic fields. Diglossia is extremely effective and plays a major role in the field of education in general as well as the learning/teaching process of Arabic in particular. Arabic, indeed, is considered as one of the strongest examples of world languages that show this phenomenon [1]. As Arabic is strongly diglossic, it is hypothesized that L2 learners studying in Iraq will definitely face some linguistic obstacles. Throughout the author's experience, L2 learners are often confused and embarrassed when using Arabic due to their poor linguistic skills. This confusion arises mainly when they communicate with Iraqis using every day spoken language. Although Arab children are native speakers of Arabic, they face serious difficulties in their learning when joining schools due to spending the first five years of their lives to learn/use a specific Arabic vernacular. According to Al-Brri Q, et al. [2], Al-Sharoni, states that “The phenomenon of language diglossia about standard and slang is existed in the educational field as part of the society in general, and most of the educational process elements suffer from this diglossia. Moreover, it has a negative effect on the language and the process of teaching”. It is necessary to mention that all over the Arabic-speaking World, people use one Standard Language but various spoken varieties for their communication purposes. Both learners (native children and Foreigners) have to learn and use Standard Arabic in the classroom to express themselves. Using the slang language in the classroom environment by the teacher or learners is unacceptable and risky. It may happen that native children, due to their linguistic Arabic background, “resort to include phrases and vocabulary that is not based on language correctly, or vocabulary deviate in their voice performance for the right way to standard linguistic sound, according to Al-Brri Q, et al. [2]. They use the home/street language to answer questions orally at the early stages of learning. According to Maamouri M [3], young Arab learners of formal Arabic do not have the opportunity of being free to use and innovate in the Modern Standard Arabic. Therefore, students joining school for the first time must drop or even avoid almost all of their linguistic habits while working on acquiring a new linguistic set of ‘rigid’ rules in the classroom. Thus, native children as well as L2 learners almost face the same difficulties, as language learners, whereas beyond school and for social daily communications, they both need to use the colloquial language; in the sense to use different vocabulary in the context of oral expressions. It is common and natural when a foreign learner tries to take a course of Arabic language in Iraq, the variety or the language to learn is Modern Standard Arabic. Thus, this person will definitely find himself unable to communicate properly with others to achieve his daily needs successfully since Iraqi people use a regional variety for all their daily communications. One of the difficulties faced by an L2 learner in Iraq is the use of two codes, namely Modern Standard Arabic and Regional Dialect of the same language usually used by Iraqi society for different functions. Such a diglossic situation represents a true difficulty mainly for L2 learners. Linguistically speaking, the situation in the Arab World is characterized as being dual that confirms the availability of two codes: the formal and the colloquial. Some Arab linguists, such as Badawi SM [4], farther believe that the complexity of Arabic exceeds these two levels. In fact, they are only the two extremes of the entire phonetic variant. He distinguished five different levels of discourse and focused on the truths that must be fundamentally included in the range: Classical Arabic (CA), Modern Standard Arabic (MSA), Educated Spoken Arabic (ESA), Semiliterate Arabic, and Illiterate Spoken Arabic. MSA and CA are the most two distinguished standard variants by the most scholars. MSA is generally based on Classical Arabic, and most Arabs attribute the two registers as two varieties of the same language. CA is strongly regarded as the parent tongue of all spoken Arabic dialects. Generally, “Arabic is the most serious problem” on the pronunciation and orthographic levels [5]. Leaners of Arabic language usually encounter serious and ongoing challenges mainly during their preliminary stages of learning. Therefore, Arabic, according to Ayouby K [6], is thought to be a ‘truly foreign language’ due to having enormous characteristics that make it specifically defying to novice learners. Some of the noticeable difficulties facing Arabic language learners; they are required to get familiar with a new writing system, new phonological properties, grasping and understanding that Arabic language is not entirely vocalized in the written form along with the need to master a lot of Arabic vocabulary and grammatical rules before being capable to speak and engage in basic communication.

Although Foreign learners may have some courses of Modern Standard Arabic, which is called (al-fusha), in their homelands before joining schools in Iraq, they might not be aware of the issue of diglossia because of the insufficient interaction with native speakers of Arabic who use a variety that is called ‘al-amiyya or ad-darija’ for their daily life communication [7]. Al-fusha may refer to any of the three following types: CA, SA, or MSA. The differences among these codes will be discussed later on. Therefore, one of the main objective of this study is to understand the nature of the awareness by L2 learners and the motivation about Arabic diglossia used in Iraq.

Generally speaking, teaching Arabic as a foreign language usually concentrates on the MSA language, as this is the written form which is broadly and officially used in all communicative settings in the academic and non-academic fields, such as schools, international business, international relations or media. It is common that many Arabs may not have accurate linguistic knowledge about MSA since it is not familiar among laymen, some educated people, and even Arabic language teachers who are supposedly being closer to this language. It is necessary to tell that many discussion sessions have been held with 5 teachers of Arabic language to non-native learners to explore the true difficulties, through their experience, realized and often encountered and the best approach to teach first or to use the integrated program. These teachers have emphasized that once students have acquired some knowledge of basic communication in MSA, colloquial or dialect variants can be introduced. Thus, the invaluable suggestions and views of these teachers are highly enriched this study. The teachers work in a religious school, which have thousands of foreign students, in the Shiit Holy city Al Najaf. Below are the major points discussed: (1) how diglossia affects the learners’ progress, (2) the preference of the variety to learn first, (3) how far learners are aware about the diglossic situation in Iraq, (4) how diglossia affects the learners’ motivation in the native Arabic environment, (5) the impression of L2 learners of Arabic when they may find it confusing that the language exposed to or learnt in the class is not beneficial at all for daily life interaction with the native speakers, (6) through teachers’ experience, learners’ preference to have Arabic language course in Iraq or in their homelands, and (7) to understand the L2 learners’ awareness, perception and motivation about Arabic diglossia.

Diglossia is a crucial concept in sociolinguistics. It refers to the usage of two codes within the same community for different purposes. It is known as a dual linguistic situation in which two varieties coexist and almost closely-related. The first variety is High (H) and prestigious used by governments as well as other institutions for all their formal communications and called standard whereas the second is Low (L) and of less prestige usually used as spoken vernacular tongue. So, it is a language used on two occasions in a community, the first is standard and the second is regional [8]. Al Khuli MA [8] gives Arabic as an example and assures that diglossia may develop from various ongoing codes and eventuate in different language situations. Usually, one of the forms is literary or prestigious, and the other one is a common spoken dialect used by the public. This situation is available in various speech communities worldwide. For example, in Iraq the prestigious variety is the MSA or the classical, which is the language of Qur’an used alongside the colloquial Arabic. One of the most crucial characteristics of diglossia is specialization, in the sense, H is suitable in specific situations while L in others.

If we consider the literal meaning of a variety to be high and the other is low, it means we talk about rank/status of which the former is prestigious and broadly used, compared to the latter, while in reality all the way around is true because on a daily life communication base among a country’s people, the regional variety (L) is used more than the former (H). Consequently, someone may ask how can that happen and why the formal written language is superior to the colloquial in such a case while linguistically speaking, language is basically oral (exists and used before writing) and there is a tremendous number of illiterate people worldwide who know little about H. Is it because of respect, admiration or reverence due to the use in religious documents, such as Quran or laws of church? What is exactly behind this status?

Linguists as well as sociolinguists frequently use the term "diglossia" to refer to the way non-standard variants of native languages ​​or dialects are distributed in real life worldwide. In many cases, the standard and nonstandard dialects have an organized relationship in society, and they have a structured relationship in the individual's mouth. Many speech communities use two or more varieties of the same language in different situations under different circumstances. Thus, “Languages and their varieties exist in complex interrelations in which they are assigned different tasks. The combination of the forms and functions of distinct codes came to be known as a specific type of bilingualism or diglossia” [9]. Therefore, it is believed that diglossia is a crucial phenomenon which has extremely attracted the attention/interest of western as well as Arab linguists, sociolinguists and philologists. Although diglossia is an important sociolinguistic phenomenon which highly attracted the linguists and sociolinguists’ attention and interest worldwide, Arab counterparts, linguists and sociolinguists, unfortunately didn’t show the same required consideration and enthusiasm to this phenomenon.

It is familiar that Ferguson was the founder of the concept of diglossia in 1959. He made it popular and used it to describe the simultaneous use of two codes in the same society grounded on functional focusing. As mentioned above, the high variety is prestigious and normed, acquired through formal education, and usually reserved for written communication and official oral interactions, whereas the low one which is used for daily communications and in informal contexts is learned inside the family environment and always tends to be spoken and not often dedicated to writing.

Ferguson C [5] further describes diglossia as “a relatively stable language situation in which, in addition to the primary dialects of the language (which may include a standard or regional standards), there is a very divergent, highly codified (often grammatically more complex) superposed variety, the vehicle of a large and respected body of written literature, either of an earlier period or in another speech community, which is learned largely by formal education and is used for most written and formal spoken purposes but is not used by any sector of the community for ordinary conversation”. Ferguson justifies the reasons behind the emergence of this phenomenon saying “diglossia is likely to come into being when the following three conditions hold in a given speech community: (1) There is a sizable body of literature in a language closely related to (or even identical with) the natural language of the community. […] (2) Literacy in the community is limited to a small elite. (3) A suitable period of time, of the order of several centuries, passes from the establishment of (1) and (2)” [5].

Although the majority believe that the term diglossia is first used by the sociolinguist Ferguson in 1959 to refer to a specific type of bilingualism wherein two existing varieties of different prestige act as rivals, it is Karl Krumbacher, according to Paulston CB, et al. [10] was the first scholar who raised the concept and discussed the nature, origin and development of diglossia in his book ‘Das Problem der Neugriechen Schrift’ in 1902 focusing on Greek and Arabic linguistic situations, and this act continued as well by Marcais, a French linguist, in 1930 in his book ‘La Diglossie Arabe. Accurately speaking, diglossia was first used in Greek language to refer to bilingualism in general, but later on used precisely, and its meaning coined by Emmanuel Rhoides in the prologue of his "Parerga" in 1885. In Greek, it was being spelled διγλωσσία (diglōssia). Subsequently, in 1930, the Arabist William Marçais adapted the term and rendered it into French as diglossie to characterize the linguistic situation in Arabic-speaking countries [11], but in 1959 the sociolinguist Charles Ferguson presented its English equivalent, diglossia, in his article published in the Journal Word.

Antony P [12], in his online lecture on variation in English, has explained and confirmed that the term diglossia consists of two morphemes; di- means two and -gloss means tongue. The term diglossia is really, as earlier mentioned, taken from the Greek to mean speaking two languages/codes and the speaker, based on his decision, can choose one of the co-existing varieties according to the situation and circumstances. Thus, diglossia is the combination of two distinct codes in their form and function.

Arabic diglossia highly fits the definition and classification of the H and L varieties made by Ferguson in 1959. Ferguson C [5] stated that the Arabic language has two functionally distinct forms: high and low. The high form is used exclusively in specific areas and is deemed to be the linguistic standard, whilst the low form is used for casual daily contact. For example, in Iraq the MSA is primarily used in all governmental communications, educational and academic fields, religious sermons, political speeches, business letters, news broadcast, poetry and all other formal communications while the colloquial/regional Arabic is used for all informal communication such as among family members and acquaintances, on the streets and any casual congregating. Therefore, it has been found that Ferguson’s definition and classification of Arabic diglossia is an extremely justifiable choice for our study.

Ferguson C [5] illustrated that “even where the feeling of the reality and superiority of H is not so strong, there is usually a belief that H is somehow more beautiful, more logical, better able to express important thoughts, and the like”. We usually acquire the L variety, which is our native language that we absolutely speak without efforts, on our mothers’ knees as a real language while the H variety is learned later in schools, but if it happened that someone doesn’t join a school, he would likely don’t know much about it and consequently cannot use it.

Diverse uses of the same language coexist with their different roles in diglossia. To illustrate this concept, Fasold R [13] states that High variety (H) and Low variety (L) usage roles are seen not just in one language, but also in multi languages, a phenomenon known as double diglossia. Double diglossia can be realized into the form of double overlapping diglossia, double nested diglossia, or linear polyglossia. In some circumstances (especially with creole languages), the relationship between (H) and (L) is a continuum rather than a diglossia; for example, in Jamaica, Jamaican Creole is (L) while Standard English is (H).

Research design

The occurrence of diglossia which is a sociolinguistic phenomenon is one of Arabic language’s distinguishing traits. Accordingly, this research paper has been designed to investigate the impact and challenges that international students face when communicating with Iraqi people due to the existence of dual aspects of language: formal and dialectal. In order to achieve the assigned goals of this study properly and accurately, the researcher has spared no efforts to consider various aspects and consult as well as examined different sources.

The paper has tackled various previously carried out studies but unfortunately no proper satisfactory solutions provided to assist L2 learners to overcome the problem of the diglossic situation. The perspectives and observations of some prominent scholars in the field of sociolinguistics, the debate sessions held with some well-experienced teachers of Arabic as a Foreign language, and ultimately some semi structured interviews organized to investigate the awareness, motivation and impression of the Foreign students to the diglossic situation they face on a daily base and how they can manage it. All the above mentioned factors which represents the major elements of the study have been analysed and described fully.

Data analysis

The principle question of this study is to explore and assess the difficulties and challenges facing L2 learners of Arabic language studying in Iraq and how to make it possible for them to overcome the diglossic situation in the native environment as well as which approach to learn first; the standard or the dialectal. To achieve the assignment properly, the study relied on various sources to collect the data required. Since this research paper is of qualitative nature, various perspectives related to diglossia as well as its effects on L2 learners living and studying in such environment have objectively been scrutinized. The semi structured interviews made comprised the following questions:

• Do you face difficulty when communicating with Iraqi people?
• Since you are learning the formal code (MSA), are you willing to learn the dialectal code as well?
• Do you believe that the formal code is sufficient to achieve your daily needs?
• Which code do you like to learn first?
• Do you love to have a course of the dialectal code before coming to Iraq?

Interviewees have provided different answers for these questions which have been carefully tackled and deeply analysed.

Brief background information of teaching Arabic as a foreign language

The subject of Arabic language teaching and learning is part of the field of applied linguistics which includes teachers’ as well as learners’ perspectives in the educational environment. Arabic is evenly and similarly taught in the Arab world and abroad. This language is first learnt by those called musta’ariboon (Arabists). Learning this language, Arabists highly considered this issue of Arabic diglossia in learning Arabic as a foreign language. Learning and teaching Arabic as a foreign language has been realized and developed abroad according to foreign learners’ perspectives. Arab scholars call the process of teaching Arabic to non-native speakers ‘ta’alim al-‘arabiyya li-ḡayr al-nᾱtiqeen bihᾱ’. They became extremely concerned about teaching of Arabic as a Foreign language, and have constantly tried to maintain a connection with the recent advancements in the field of Foreign language teaching and accordingly apply them to the idiosyncrasies of Arabic language in specific and to teaching Arabic as a Foreign language in general, which they perceive as a distinct from other language teaching.

Scholars’ perspectives towards the theory of diglossia

Diglossia has been described in various ways by many scholars, each according to his/her own perspective toward this phenomenon, and in the same time some other scholars suggested other terminologies to characterize it. For example, Kloss H [14] presented ‘in-diglossia’, when the two varieties are closely related, and ‘out-diglossia’, when the two varieties are unrelated or at best distantly related, whereas Ferguson C [5] suggested the term ‘Classical’ and Fishman proposed ‘Extended’.

In 1967, Fishman made an attempt to modify and redefine the term diglossia coined by Ferguson. He extended the concept of diglossia to include bilingual cultures wherein languages are evaluated in a hierarchical order. It is not only Fishman but Macnamara J [15] as well held responsible for the generalization of the domain of diglossia. They all have tried to provide a single theoretical framework to describe the societal norms that controls the use of linguistic varieties in bi-or multilingual speech communities. They expanded the realm of the term to include all multilingual or multidialectal societies that manipulate various registers or codes according to the rules of discourse. But, their opponents find that such act would trivialize the term diglossia, specifically when Arabic is concerned.

Sociolinguists believe that this expanded model will certainly not encompass the characteristics and features originally produced by Ferguson. Therefore, this expansion by the proponents of the single theoretical model has been denied by many scholars, such as Andrẻ Martinet and others, for different reasons. Andrẻ Martinet entirely rejects the perspective of treating diglossia as a sort of bilingualism. However, this is undesirable since it appears to belittle the topic of Arabic diglossia. He presented his definition which is unlike Ferguson’s, mainly in two vital aspects, namely the number of languages and the degree of linguistic difference between them. He argues that a diglossic situation could take place in case of any two functionally unrelated varieties [16]. For example, in Alsace, the Alsatian language (Elsässisch) is used as a low language (L) and French as a high language (H). Heinz Kloss calls the (H) variant "exoglossia" and the (L) variant "endoglossia" [17]. He adds that “the use of several separate codes within a single society (and their stable maintenance rather than the displacement of one by the other over time) was found to be dependent on each code’s serving functions distinct from those considered appropriate for the other” (Ibid).

Therefore, the functional category according to Fasold R [13] portrays the diglossic situation saying “only function remains unchallenged; it is the very heart and soul of the diglossia concept”. Fasold and Fishman almost have the same perspectives. Fasold has broaden the concept of diglossia as well claiming that differences are available between two languages or two dialects inside the same multilingual community. He depicts it as double diglossia. He further adds that the form of double diglossia can be developed into double overlapping diglossia (like that found in Tanzania where there are various types of languages such as English, Swahili, along with some other regional languages), double nested diglossia (two languages recognized between H and L varieties and both have other varieties or dialects that also given a rank as H varieties and L varieties, mainly in Khalapur-India) and linear polyglossia (such as languages of English speaking Malaysian Chinese living in Malaysia where Malaysian English is H1 and Standard Malaysian is H2 alongside the Low Chinese (L1) and other (L2) Chinese languages. Hogg, et al. [18] have criticized Fasold and Fishmans’ broad definitions considering their acts effectively emasculated diglossia and consequently made it lose its diglossic validity. Pap L [19] suggests that it would be better to reject this expansion or modification made by Fishman, Fasold and others and stick to the original version. Ferguson M [20], in her turn, agrees with Hogg et al. [18] and advises against such a terminological mash-up, claiming that it will lead to the term being used for ‘stylistic functional variation' masking its distinctive psychological linguistic characteristics. Further, she believes that “diglossia implies sufficiently similar languages for the speakers to feel that it is the same language, yet remote enough, so that the acquisition of the literary language implies long-term efforts and can never be fully achieved.”

One of the main characteristics of the linguistic situation in the Arab world is being diglossic which means the existence of dual aspect of language: formal and dialectal. Al-Batal M [21], supporting this view, adds that the utmost typical features of Arabic language is the occurrence of diglossia. Iraqi society, in fact, resembles other communities such as Egyptian, Lebanese, Persian and some European communities where two varieties, namely standard and regional dialects are used side by side and assigned different tasks. According to Ferguson C [5], members of these communities “speak their local dialect at home or among family or friends of the same dialect area but use the standard language in communicating with speakers of other dialects or on public occasion”.

Zughoul MR [22], like some other sociolinguists, believes that Arabic language diglossia is one of the major linguistic subjects that face not only L2 learners but all the native speakers of Arabic as well and extremely influence the social, psychological, and educational properties of the society. Due to the existence of diglossic and bidialectal situations in the Arab World, “some educated Arabs find it difficult to carry on a conversation in MSA” [11]. Furthermore, it is common that the high rate of illiteracy in any Arabic country is considered the principal crucial factor responsible for the linguistic gap between the MSA and other colloquial aspects/forms.

Since MSA is not inherent or acquired naturally from birth, it is the mother tongue of no one. Usually, children acquire their regional dialect effortlessly and spontaneously through contact with their parents, family members and friends while MSA is later learnt when joining school. Therefore, MSA is officially used in the educational area as well as some other fields such as media, newspapers and literary acts. Accordingly, all Arabs find MSA is unfit and artificial to be used for daily communication.

Arabic language is well known for its hard orthographic, phonetic and semantic properties. Because of the diglossic situation in all Arab countries, an Arab who travels to another Arabic country may sometimes not understand properly the dialect used there because of pronunciation or meaning. For example, some lexical terms used in Iraq and Egypt have the same form/pronunciation but different meanings, such as the word ‘mebsoot’ which means happy in the Egyptian vernacular while in Iraq it means strongly beaten. It is highly suitable and funny to tell the following anecdote: being of Iraqi origin, one day while I was teaching in Saudi Arabia, a bee entered the class and in order to make the students avoid it, I spontaneously said “students take care ‘zanboor’ (bee) is in the class”. Immediately, the students burst out laughing loud which made me surprised and almost angry, and therefore I asked the students about the reason of laughing. As a result, one of the students asked me “Do you know the meaning of this word in Saudi dialect, doctor?” I replied, I guess it is an insect called bee, like in Iraq. Finally, I learnt it means vagina. Just imagine in Saudi Arabia and before teenagers to say such a thing in the class. This might cost you your position. Consequently, a person will definitely find himself obliged, in order to avoid embarrassment, to use the MSA to make his speech more comprehensible.

As earlier mentioned, the major obstacle faces most learners of Arabic is the writing system which is entirely different from other various regional spoken dialects in the whole Arab World. The difficulty doesn’t lie only in the writing system but goes to pronunciation, vocabulary, grammar and the verb tenses as well. Consequently, even the most advanced student of Standard Arabic may find himself entirely embarrassed on the streets of Baghdad, while, in the same time, the same person after being for a year in an immersion program may not be able to understand fully a text written in Standard Arabic. Arabic is also known for its diacritical marks, which are related to the writing system. These marks are symbols used to help in making reading and pronunciation better and play a major role in word recognition. This system was created by the Arab scholar called Al-Farahidi in order to avoid the ambiguity of letters and words. Based on previous studies, the creation of this diacritic system is to assist non-native speakers to read and comprehend the holy book, Al-Qur’an, since this script is not simple mainly in the aspect of word recognition. So, it is extremely difficult for L2 learners of Arabic to read a text properly without the use of these marks. For example, the Arabic word (كتب) without diacritical marks may look ambiguous on the meaning and pronunciation levels. To illustrate the impact of the diacritical marks, see the following table:

Generally speaking, native speakers of Arabic are often aware of Arabic diglossia and perceive MSA as highly prestigious compared to colloquial Arabic since they believe MSA is the correct and pure language, whereas colloquial dialects are erroneous or impure, but Kaye [11] assures that current spoken vernaculars don’t intend to corrupt the High variety; rather, they have their own distinctive existence since they are available beyond the Arab peninsula.

A functional contrast between the two types of Arabic is practically realized, as Ferguson C [5] mentioned, when only Standard Arabic (SA) is the official language in many Arabic-speaking nations and is used by educated Arabs for formal reading, writing, and communiquẻ while native Arabs, on the other hand, whether educated or illiterate, use the spoken dialect for everyday communication, such as family chats, cultural dialogues and discussions, shopping, and entertainment [23]. Palmer J [24] bolstered these arguments by concluding that the H variety is rarely utilized for spoken purposes, whereas the low variants are seldom codified or used in writing as illustrated in the table below, provided by Ferguson C [5], in which he stated the appropriate situational distinction between the H and L varieties, in the sense “In one set of situations only H is appropriate and in another only L, with the two sets overlapping only very slightly”. Below is a list of possible situations in which the varieties normally used.

Ferguson C [5], in order to illustrate the concept of diglossia, established nine categories to show their priorities according to function, prestige, literary heritage, acquisition, standardization, stability, grammar, lexicon, and phonology. “The functional linguistic distribution, or the specialisation of function, is the ‘existential’ feature of diglossia” [9].

Almost all languages have names for H and L. Below are some examples retrieved and modified from Ferguson C [5].

Some scholars, such as Badawi SM [4], assure that the Arabic language complexity extends beyond these two levels, and that they are only the two extremes of a broader range of linguistic diversity. He distinguishes five basic levels of speech and emphasizes that the range must contain all of them. These levels are: Classical Arabic (SA), Modern Standard Arabic (MSA), Educated Spoken Arabic (ESA), Semiliterate Spoken Arabic, and Illiterate Spoken Arabic. The high variety which is called al-fusha refers to Standard Arabic (SA), Classical Arabic (CA), or Modern Standard Arabic (MSA).

Arabic diglossia emerged in the eighth century at the time the literary language was consistently written or codified primarily and standardized using the texts of the holy Qur’an as well as the pre Islamic poetry as principal sources. It is still systematic in its morphology and syntax and used in writing and formal environment [7].

Kaye A, [25] mentions that Arabic diglossia is the most typical confusing example of diglossia, since Arabic is officially spoken in numerous countries, and there are more than 300 million native Arabic speakers. For sure the number is bigger now. Since Ferguson’s formidable seminal work in 1959, which established a distinction between the Arabic standard variety and other Arabic vernaculars, there have been various constant studies concentrating on figuring out the ties between such language variations and other demographic issues such as age, gender, education and ethnic matters. It is essential to tell that the main problem related to Arabic diglossia is the belief that ‘al-amiyya or ad-darija’ (vernacular) is often seen as less prestigious variety, and it is also not a typical part of any study. Such opinion drops the fact that the regional dialect is the preferable choice for daily life communication in the time that MSA is not the mother tongue of any community in the Arab world. Therefore, successful communication abilities cannot be built up and achieved successfully through learning only MSA, as Ryding KC [26] believes that “the educational establishment [in the United States] has for decades enforced the concept of MSA first and foremost, this is completely the reverse of the native speaker’s experience with Arabic as a mother tongue”. It is hypothesized that integrating the Arabic spoken variety of a country into the curriculum may keep learners avoid the embarrassment, frustration and miscommunication with native speakers.

Three major problems figured out by Ferguson C [5] related to the Arabic diglossic nature: 1) to learn two languages in one which definitely complicates the learning process, 2) learners are required to choose a dialect since there is no standard dialect, 3) the existence of intermediate forms between extreme poles of H and L. Learners studying MSA first and then continue and get the opportunity to study spoken dialect may feel it as a challenge to study two languages of different morphology and syntax under the name Arabic. Consequently, the differences between the two varieties will be a true dilemma for L2 learners [27].

This paper will focus on the complications that arise in the educational context as a result of this diglossic scenario wherein High variation is superior to Low variety. Palmer J [24] clarifies that the functional difference between the two encompasses a seven-fold impact on the diglossic dilemma which L2 learners may find it perplexing due to the fact that the language taught in the classroom may not be useful for daily life communication and may not aid learners in mingling with the native Arab community. Based on this view, the author of this paper took the burden to verify this assumption which claims that the functional distinction between H and L creates diglossic dilemma since L2 learners of Arabic may find it confusing that the language exposed to or learnt in the classroom is not beneficial at all for daily life interaction with the native speakers. Palmer J [24] confirms that due to such discriminatory perceptions of Arabic diglossia, L2 learners in native language environments face significant learning challenges. It is assumed that almost all L2 learners of Arabic who have no previous exposure to Arabic language may have no knowledge about Arabic diglossia regarding H and L varieties, and they may only know about it when they get immersed in an Arabic language programme which usually uses the Modern Standard Arabic as medium of instruction.

The diglossic situation in the Arab-speaking world has resulted in "sociolinguistic tension" and ambiguous feelings toward MSA and CA as well, as seen by the use of various varieties at home and at school [28]. Arabic language learners, particularly children, are required to do the writing tasks in MSA, while expressing themselves in another. Such linguistic tension and fluctuating between the H and L varieties is also boosted by the vague and rough distinction between the MSA and CA because of the ambiguity in the syntactic markers and vowels.

In some cases, well-educated Arabs are unable to avoid using spoken dialect in particular situations while less educated Arabs are often unable to stick to the rules of literary language since such rules are varied depending on the genre, period, and audience. Holmes J [28] states that this leads to producing hybrid linguistic forms, hypercorrections, and overlapping constructions wherein one variety often uses the elements of the other. Such intricating overlapping can be of binary effect; supportive and complicating according to Al-Batal M [21] following words: “Although MSA and the dialects do show a considerable amount of overlapping and the student’s knowledge of MSA will greatly facilitate their learning of any Arabic dialect, this does little to alleviate the frustration and disappointment felt by the students once they face the realities of the diglossic situation in the Arab world.” He (ibid) adds that the diglossic problematic issue could further escalate for L2 learners due to the general intension of so many native speakers of Arabic to include some components of MSA and spoken varieties in specific situations of which the inevitable occurrence of intermediate aspect of language called al-lughah al-wusta in Arabic and is also called Educated Spoken Arabic (ESA) or Formal Spoken Arabic (FSA). This variety is mainly used for international and semiformal communications and it is more prestigious than the other spoken varieties of Arabic known as al-‘ammiya. Multiple meanings of the same linguistic construct occur from such convergence or switching, which may obstruct the creation of consistent meaning connected with language expression among L2 learners.

To summarize, the disparities between MSA and other spoken varieties of Arabic will definitely create an educational dilemma for both students and teachers of Arabic as a foreign language. There has been much debate over the years about whether to teach MSA, the spoken dialect of Arabic or both, and at what level of schooling [26]. MSA is currently taught in all Arab countries' schools beginning in grade one, and language specialists entirely support this practice, arguing that teaching the spoken variety of Arabic may result in incorrect language use, and that it may be easier to transit from MSA to the spoken variety than it would be otherwise [29].

The field of education in general, and the teaching of the Arabic course in particular, have been greatly influenced by Arabic diglossia. Maamouri M [3] states that since it is characterized by the utilization of two assortments in integral conveyance, diglossia has its touches and effect on the teaching/learning process. By this, Maamouri tries to bring to our attention the "low quality results" of the diglossic environment in the schools and the linguistic gap between different Arabic vernaculars and MSA (al-fuṣħā). Younes M [30] strongly confirms that although Arabs are of one nation, they distinctively use different dialects but one standard language which is the MSA regularly preferable to teach almost in all Arabic programs. However, those who learn to speak only the MSA language could definitely not be capable to put it in practice to achieve their daily life needs. If they try to communicate with native speakers of Arabic beyond school using this variety, they will look funny and embarrassed as well as not to understand or being understood.

There is an ongoing debate, whether in the Arab World or abroad, about which form or variety of Arabic to teach to Foreigners. According to Thalji [31], this issue of which form of Arabic “should be taught is still in question”. Through the debate held with some teachers of Arabic as a foreign language, they have entirely matched Thalji’s view regarding this issue and the possibility of using spoken varieties in the process of teaching/learning of Arabic. These teachers assured that diglossia in the classroom has received limited attention. Younes M [30] said it quite clear “I believe that teaching a spoken dialect for everyday conversation and MSA for reading, writing and formal speaking is the most effective way to prepare students for function in Arabic.” Thus, L2 learners of Arabic are required to learn/master both varieties in order to dominate all the aspects of +social situations wherein they may use the language. Kassem A, et al. [32] suggest that any real solution to the present problems associated with the teaching of Arabic as a foreign language must address the sociolinguistic situation in the Arab world. Since teaching one variety of the language is not enough if the real goal is to graduate students who are proficient in all aspects of the language, then an approach which offers both varieties is the only answer”.

Younes M [33] strongly thinks that any Arabic language teaching program driving at preparing students to use Arabic language successfully and to implement the function required in the proper situation normally practiced by native speakers have to include both MSA and a spoken dialect. To achieve this program, three ways proposed by Ferguson C [5] need to be followed. Either to start with MSA and introduce a dialect later on or to start with a spoken dialect and then introducing the MSA, whereas the 3rd method is to start with both varieties simultaneously. The 1st option is entirely denied by Younes M [33] because he believes that teaching MSA first for all language skills clashes with the fact that MSA is not used for everyday communication. He further adds that if the two varieties presented and taught separately, a certain amount of duplication and waste is highly expected and surely becomes uneasy for the student to integrate and master them into a single language system. The 3rd option of teaching the two varieties simultaneously, in order to use MSA for formal activities such as speaking, reading and writing while a spoken dialect is used for ordinary daily conversation, is firmly rejected by Younes M [33]. He insists that this option is “the least plausible of the three”. He based his perspective on the following: to introduce learners, instantaneously, to two varieties of a foreign language from the very beginning informing them that each code is to be used in a specific situation will be formidable and confusing. Counting on the faith of the curriculum designer to the principle of authenticity, Younes loves to see/have a course “that truly reflects the sociolinguistic situation, then MSA materials will focus on areas in which MSA is used. So, while students are learning to communicate orally at the level of personal identification in the spoken dialect, they would, at the same time, be learning the language of literature, newspaper, news broadcasts, and formal speaking” [33]. In other words, he recommends the approach that is based on the integration of a spoken Arabic dialect and the MSA in order to reflect the exact way Arabic is acquired and used by native speakers. Thus, the Arabic program, according to this approach, would start with a spoken Arabic dialect in order to build dialectal bases skills in listening and speaking, and then gradually introduce MSA materials. The core of this process is to build these skills in order to communicate in daily situations wherein the regional vernacular is typically used, such as personal identification, family matters, weather, work, asking for directions, etc. It is worthy to mention and emphasize that the regional spoken dialect would not be casted off the introduction of MSA materials, but rather both varieties would be used side by side, identical to the way they are used by Arabic native speakers [33]. This reflects Younes’ support to the integrated approach which treats MSA and the spoken dialect as two varieties of the same language and not two separate languages. He further believes that since both varieties share common linguistic features, duplication will be minimized in an integrated course, and the process of mastering the two varieties will require considerably less time and effort than learning two languages. However, the question that remains to be answered is how to implement such an approach in the time there are many difficulties and obstacles to introduce spoken Arabic in the specialized departments. It is believed that some of these barriers go to logistic limitations, whereas some others naturally considered ideological. Here to discuss the issue of teaching spoken Arabic, prestige, maintaining the language of Qur’an, along with the integration is highly sensitive but significant. In addition, any endeavour to eliminate importance from MSA and put accentuation on a spoken variety might be viewed as a danger to the proponents of this discourse.

Consequently, learners of Arabic encountering such ideological values and obstacles will definitely get confused. This confusion may increase when these learners use a non-standard variety, and the embarrassment will escalate as learners will sound ridiculous as well when they use only MSA. Learners of Arabic, because of these obstacles, are expected to get demotivated since they are unable to communicate with native speakers and discontinue to learn Arabic. Such potential situations justify the need for more adequate representation and integration in Arabic learning/teaching programs worldwide to match the linguistic facts on the ground in the Arab speaking countries as above mentioned. The effect of Arabic diglossia on the insight and inspiration of L2 students of Arabic language may differ between students studying in Iraq and those learning outside of the Arabic world. Throughout the discussion held with the 5 teachers of Arabic as a foreign language, it has been made clear that learners taught just one variety are not well prepared to assimilate into a diglossic community. So, to avoid frustration and to enrich the linguistic Arabic macro skills, some scholars have suggested that learners should be exposed to colloquial dialects from the beginning of their learning in order to adapt to Arabic culture. Unfortunately, all the curricula of teaching/learning Arabic as a foreign language never include spoken Arabic although there are many calls for teaching spoken Arabic. Therefore, this study tries to show some of the major challenges and considerations that may be required to tackle before including spoken Arabic vernacular to curricula. Anyway, there are many scholars, one of them is Wahba KM [34] who wrote “In light of current theories of Foreign language acquisition, selecting only one ‘variety’ of Arabic for instruction, such as classical or colloquial, will seriously prejudice the ability of the non-native learner to communicate effectively in an Arabic-speaking community”. He adds “both varieties of the language should be taught together, as occurs in natural speech contexts”. Likewise, Al-Batal M [35] is calling for “an alternative approach” of teaching Arabic in which he recommends teaching a colloquial beside MSA in the classroom in order to match the linguistic reality on the ground in the Arab world. He suggests that those of low proficiency should be exposed to a more colloquial component and those of higher levels concentrate more on MSA. Younes M [36] goes farther considering MSA and spoken Arabic as one body of different sides. He believes that “Each side of this system is used in situations and for functions for which it is uniquely suited, and both sides are necessary for functioning in the full range of situations where an educated native speaker is expected to function”. Palmer J [24] doesn’t deny teaching both varieties, but he stipulates “If Spoken Arabic is taught, it is done so in a separate class”. Palmer J [24] pointed out that “Arabic language teaching and learning in the United States is similar to that found in the Arab World. This similarity is manifest in the prominence placed on MSA”. But, as a matter of fact, in the USA, “There are a few universities that have adopted an integrated approach in Arabic teaching in which MSA and Spoken Arabic are taught concurrently. These few programs however, are the striking exception rather than the norm” [24]. According to the debate held with the 5 teachers, they agreed that the acquisition of MSA will never get hindered by the teaching of spoken Arabic, MSA acquisition is definitely boosted. Learners of Arabic have to get exposed to both standard and spoken varieties simultaneously in order to approach native or near native skills. The American Council on Teaching Foreign Languages proficiency guides made it clear that it is highly essential to have an integrated educational approach wherein both varieties of Arabic should be taught in order for the learners to be efficient and skilful in MSA as well as one spoken variety. In his study, Palmer J [7] mentioned that a big number of learners are willing to restart their learning of Arabic, if they would get the opportunity, to learn initially a spoken Arabic vernacular to have it easier for them to integrate with the Arabic environment and culture, whereas others are highly interested to learn MSA because of its prestigious usage; however, contradictorily they are unable to appreciate that spoken vernaculars are greatly essential in facilitating daily life communication. In line with the above mentioned views regarding teaching spoke dialect, there is still something perplexing since different and various spoken languages used in the Arab world; which one should be taught abroad? In his study, Palmer has emphasized that learners of Arabic are highly willing to have both varieties in order to make it easier for them to interact with the native speakers of Arabic, however, teachers are not in favour owing to their priorities to teach the prestigious variety. Such approach, according to Palmer, “is often the boiling point for heated debate among Arabic teaching professionals”. Accordingly, people in charge of curricula design are advised to consider such perspectives in order to make L2 learners better prepared to face all the linguistic realities in the Arab world.

Because of the increased demand for learning Arabic language, specialists are encouraging research to find alternative approaches for teaching Arabic. For example, Gass S [37] states “Many would point out that SLA research is quite skewed in the direction of a few languages. Unfortunately, Arabic is not one of them, but the acquisition of Arabic is a field awaiting exploration”. This exploration is extremely crucial for the time being in which the number of enrolments in Arabic courses is booming worldwide. There is an insistent need to explore some new approaches of teaching Arabic diglossia that make a link between the two varieties in order to accomplish a balanced proficiency in the four language skills: speaking, listening, reading, and writing [32]. One of the main objectives of this study is to investigate the feasibility and the effects of integrating the two varieties in one curriculum. Hopefully, the educational field of Arabic language teaching/learning worldwide consider these points and put in practice the calls for including spoken varieties in the Arabic language program curricula. To conclude, the literature above excessively discussed the standard and the integrated approach. The following points summarize the main differences between the two:

• The integrated approach usually supplies students with authentic communicative input which recreates the context in which Arabic L1 is acquired, whereas the standard approach is limited to situational input where students are instructed to learn a variety of oral structures which by its nature have narrow or limited functional domains.
• The integrated approach distinguishes the common features between the two varieties and make use of these features in terms of medium of instruction in the classroom as well as the nature of input provided.
• The integrated approach makes the chance available for learners to develop the four macro-skills in the same way L1 learners of Arabic do, whereas in the standard approach both speaking and listening are attributed secondary educational status [32]. Eventually, it is felt necessary to share L2 learners’ perspectives since they are the main customers/audience taking the course or concerned. In his statistical analysis of the learners’ answers to the items of a questionnaire related to Arabic language learning, Palmer J [24] states the following:

Arabic is one of the prominent and hegemonic languages worldwide today. It is spoken by millions of people in the Arab world and outside. Teaching MSA and colloquial Arabic varieties simultaneously is an ideal process, but practically various cut off points to this approach may appear. Further, since different spoken dialects used in the Arab world, then which one to teach/learn? Let us suppose that a decision were made to teach/learn a particular spoken dialect simultaneously along with MSA, worries may highly arise, and it is likely risky for learners who may blend the two varieties especially at the early stages of their learning. Some teachers of Arabic as a foreign language recommend that once students have acquired some knowledge of basic communication in MSA, colloquial or dialect variants can be introduced. In order to find suitable and proper solutions for teaching Arabic as a foreign language, due to its diglossic characteristics, it is felt necessary for the educational context to be changed. This change could include, but not limited to, the starting age and the choice of an Arabic variety and such a positive change can be perceived in the learners’ attitudes and motivation towards Arabic as a foreign language. According to Schmidt SD, et al. [23], learners of Arabic, who started learning spoken language, had more positive attitudes and motivation related to Arabic language, the native speakers, and their culture. Consequently, they got more motivated and highly desired to learn the language in the future. Such motivation plays a major role in L2 learning. Moreover, specialists should work harder to find some alternative approaches considering the calls for including spoken varieties in the Arabic language program curricula. To do so, they are required to find answers to the following questions:

• Which variety of Arabic that should be taught first?
• Which approach is more beneficial than the other for L2 learners? And why?
• Is there a practical solution that can ensure and reflect the linguistic properties and realities of Arabic Language?
• Is it possible to teach both varieties, MSA and vernacular, simultaneously? And, how?

Therefore, the researcher recommends to have the emphasis deeply rely on research to find solutions in order to establish relevant approaches for teaching Arabic as a foreign language. As far as learners are concerned, they are needed to learn a new writing system, new phonological properties, getting a handle on and understanding that Arabic is not wholly vocalized in the written form alongside the need to master a lot of Arabic vocabulary and syntactic rules before being able to speak and participate in basic communication. Finally, to help students to read and understand better, teachers of Arabic language are required to bring to the learners’ attention the important role of diacritical marks in word recognition to determine the pronunciation and meaning as well as to avoid ambiguity.

The study has figured out that teaching/learning Arabic as a foreign language is not an easy task due to the diglossic situation in the Arab world. Some sociolinguists believe that diglossia is somehow a source of linguistic deficiency. Thus, high level research needed to innovate new relevant approaches for teaching Arabic to non-native speakers. The ongoing debate whether to teach MSA only or to follow the integrated program which includes both varieties should end with appropriate urgent solutions. The circles responsible for the educational program of teaching Arabic as a foreign language, till now, have not approached a consensus on this issue in spite of all the calls. It has been found that not only non-native speakers are affected by the diglossic situation in Iraq, but some Arab educated people as well who cannot carry on a long conversation in MSA properly, according to Kaye A [11].

Regarding learners, the study has concluded that Arabic language learners are two types in their perspectives. The first group who are studying at advanced stages of Arabic learning consider the diglossic situation as being motivating and challenging, whereas adversely the second group look demotivated due to the availability of different varieties of Arabic. The members of the first group believe that being among native speakers of Arabic can enhance the motivation level of L2 learners who will definitely have great exposure to MSA as well as the opportunity to learn the spoken language from their mates in daily life environment. The restrictions of the Arabic language course can really be realized in the discrepancies between the teachers and learners’ perceptions and priorities as learners are unable to communicate in Arabic. Therefore, it is concluded that including spoken Arabic, specifically at the early stages, can inspire learners and improve learning productivity. It is common that L2 learners' primary goal is to integrate with native Arabic speakers, but if they are exclusively taught MSA, they may struggle to converse in a community wherein spoken dialects are the source of all casual conversation. Further, in the time, there is a strong tendency to teach/learn both varieties simultaneously as well as students themselves are also willing to learn a spoken dialect before heading to study in Arabic speaking countries, we have found some other scholars still believe that MSA and spoken dialects should be taught separately. It is worthy to mention that according to one of the studies in the USA, the researcher has found that a group of learners who were exposed to the integrated program showed equal performance and in many cases better than those taught traditional standard approach. As the level of assimilation with the native speakers boost higher, L2 learners become more confident to tackle diglossic situations. Consequently, learners of high level feel more comfortable to achieve their objectives in learning and start to use the two varieties at ease in different settings.

It has been also concluded that any real situation to the problem of Arabic language teaching/learning as a foreign language must consider the sociolinguistic situation in the Arab world. As teaching one aspect of the variants is insufficient mainly when the principal objective is to have capable efficient graduate learners in all the language aspects, accordingly the only proper solution is to have an approach that presents both varieties. But, again the question remains how to put such approach in practice. Therefore, future studies, based on ours, are urged to explore and find more suitable and serious methods to overcome the binary problem of the approach of teaching Arabic as a foreign language and the difficulties encountered by L2 learners due to the diaglossic situation in the Arab world.

1. Bassiouney R. Redefining identity through code choice in al-Ḥubb fī ’l-manfā by Bahāʾ Ṭāhir. Journal of Arabic and Islamic Studies. 2010;10(1):103. doi: 10.5617/jais.4603.
2. Al-Brri Q, Bani-Yaseen M, Al-Zu’bi M, Al-Hersh M. Diglossia among students: the problem and treatment. Journal of Education and Practice. 2015;6(32):14.
3. Maamouri M. Language education and human development: Arabic diglossia and its impacts on the quality of education in the Arabic region. International Literacy Institute ILI. 1998.
4. Badawi SM. Mustawayaat al-‘arabiyyah al-mu’aaSirah fi Misr [levels of contemporary Arabic in Egypt]. Cairo: Dar al-Ma’arif. 1973;89.
5. Ferguson C. Diglossia. NY: Word Journal. International Linguistic Association. 1959;15(1):245.
6. Ayouby K. Diglossia: A critical issue confronting teachers of Arabic. University of Michigan Dearborn, MI-USA. International Journal: Language, Society and Culture. 2001;5.
7. Palmer J. Arabic diglossia: Student perceptions of spoken Arabic after living in the Arabic-speaking world. Arizona Working Papers in Second Language Acquisition and Teaching. 2008;15(1):81-95.
8. Al-Khuli MA. Dictionary of theoretical linguistics. Beirut: Librairie du Liban; 1982. p.75. 
9. Stepkowska A. Diglossia: A critical overview of the swiss example. Studia Linguistica Universitatis Iagellonicae
10. Paulston CB, Tucker GR. Sociolinguistics. UK: Blackwell; 2003. p.343.
11. Kaye A. Diglossia: The state of the art. International Journal of Social Language. 2001;152:117-129.
12. Antony P. Diglossia: Open Educational Resources Collection. 2019.
13. Fasold R. The sociolinguistics of society. Oxford: Basil Blackwell; 1984. p.44.
14. Kloss H. Types of multilingual communities: A discussion of ten variables. Sociological Inquiry. 1966;36(2):135-145. doi: 10.1111/j.1475682X.1966.tb00621.x.
15. Macnamara J. Bilingualism and primary education. A Study of Irish Experience. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press; 1967;15(1):91-92.
16. André M. Elements of general linguistics. Paris: Armand Colin; 1967. p.29.
17. Kloss H. Notes Concerning a Language-nation Typology. In: Fishman, Joshua, Ferguson, Charles, Das Gupta, Jyotirindra, editors. Language Problems of Developing Nations. NY: Wiley; 1968. p.69-85.
18. Fishman JA. Bilingualism with and without diglossia: Diglossia with and without bilingualism. Journal of Social Issues. 1967;23(2):29-38. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4560.1967.tb00573.x.
19. Pap L. Bilingualism in need of a conceptual overhaul. Journal of Language Sciences. 1982;4(1):71-84.
20. Ferguson M. Arabic diglossia and its methodological implications. In: Anghelescu M, editor. Romano Arabica. Bucharest: Romanian Association for Oriental Studies. 1974. p.81-92.
21. Al-Batal M. Issues in the teaching of the productive skills in Arabic. In: Al-Batal M, editor. The teaching of Arabic as a foreign language: Issues and directions. Provo, Utah: American Association of Teachers of Arabic. 1995.  p.115-33.
22. Zughoul MR. Diglossia in Arabic: Investigating solutions. Journal of Anthropological Linguistics. 1980;22(5):201-217.
23. Schmidt SD, Inbar O, Shohamy E. The effects of teaching spoken Arabic on students’ attitudes and motivation in Israel. The Modern Language Journal. 2004;88(2):217-28.
24. Palmer J. Arabic diglossia: Teaching only the standard variety is a disservice to students. Arizona Working Papers in Second Language Acquisition and Teaching. 2007;14(1):111-22.
25. Kaye A. More on diglossia in Arabic. International Journal of Middle East Studies. 1975;6(3):325-340.
26. Ryding KC. Discourse competence in TAFL: Skill Levels and Choice of Language Variety in the Arabic Classroom. In: Al-Batal M, editor. The Teaching of Arabic as a Foreign Language: Issues and Directions. Provo Utah: American Association of Teachers of Arabic; 1995. p.223-31.
27. Ryding KC. Proficiency despite diglossia: A new approach for Arabic. Modern Language Journal. 1991;75(2):212-218.
28. Holmes J. An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. 3rd ed. New Zealand: Pearson Longman; 2007.
29. Brosh H. The effect of learning Arabic in elementary school on achievement in literary Arabic in the 7th grade. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Tel-Aviv University. 1988;25.
30. Younes M. Elementary Arabic, an integrated approach: Student Workbook. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press; 1995.
31. Abdullah T. Diglossia. 2007.
32. Kassem A, Mansouri F. An integrated approach to the teaching of diglossic languages in a foreign setting: the case of Arabic. Journal of Arabic, Islamic and Middle Eastern Studies. 1998;4(2):47-68.
33. Younes M. An integrated approach to teaching Arabic as a foreign language. Al-Arabiyya Journal. 1990;23(1):105-22.
34. Wahba KM. Arabic Language Use and the Educated Language User. In: Kassem M, Wahba, Zeinab A, Taha, Liz E, editors. Handbook for Arabic Language Teaching Professionals. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum; 2006. p.139-55.
35. Al-Batal M. Diglossia proficiency: The need for an alternative approach to teaching. In: Rouchdy A, editor. Journal of the Arabic language in America. Detroit Michigan: Wayne State University Press; 1992. p.284-304.
36. Younes M. Integrating the Colloquial with Fusha in the Arabic as a Foreign Language Classroom. In Kassem M, Wahba, Zeinab A, Taha, Liz E, editors. Handbook for Arabic Language Teaching Professionals. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum; 2006. p.157-166.
37. Gass S. Models of Second Language Acquisition. In: Wahba K, Zeinab A, Taha, Liz E, editors. Handbook for Arabic Language Teaching Professionals. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum; 2006. p.21-33.