{"id":38,"date":"2022-11-27T23:42:36","date_gmt":"2022-11-28T04:42:36","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/sites.smith.edu\/internetlinguistics2022\/?p=38"},"modified":"2022-11-27T23:42:36","modified_gmt":"2022-11-28T04:42:36","slug":"week-10-a-case-study-of-internet-arabic","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sites.smith.edu\/internetlinguistics2022\/week-10-a-case-study-of-internet-arabic\/","title":{"rendered":"Week 10: A Case Study of Internet Arabic"},"content":{"rendered":"

Much of the analysis of Arabic language usage on the internet has focused on <\/span>Arabizi<\/span><\/i>, the non-standardized system of writing Arabic with the Latin script (Davies 70). Although these papers largely focus on orthographic features of this system, they still can provide us with some insight as to how Arabic is being used in online contexts and what routes future researchers can take to dig into the questions surrounding these uses and Arabizi in general.\u00a0\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Some Background on Arabic Dialect<\/b><\/p>\n

Arabic is distinct from English in that it has a very standardized formal form, called Modern Standard Arabic (MSA) or <\/span>Fusha<\/span><\/i>, but this form is not used by native speakers in daily speech. Every Arabic speaker speaks in dialectal Arabic. MSA is also the form of the language that has been most often used for formal writing. Writing dialectal Arabic is not new – it has historically appeared in some private contexts, like handwritten letters (71). But there are no standards for writing in dialect, and writing in dialect has been stigmatized for most of the Middle East\u2019s modern history. Using the formal variety of Arabic indicated that someone was educated; conversely, writing in dialect because one was unable to write in formal Arabic marked that person as backwards or ignorant. As such, dialectal Arabic has remained a language largely only spoken, while formal Arabic has been a largely written language, spoken only in highly formal contexts.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Rise of <\/b>Arabizi<\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

Writing Arabic with the Latin script is not a 21st century innovation. French colonialism in Morocco and other parts of northern Africa led to a bilingual administration system which used both the Arabic script and the Latin script (both for French and to transliterate Arabic) (71). But Arabizi as it exists today was shaped by technological advances and limitations. Case in point: early computers and phones couldn\u2019t display or input the Arabic script. The only choice for people who wanted to use these devices to communicate in Arabic was to write in the Latin script (71).\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Arabizi has challenged the traditional views of writing in dialect. Today, people of all educational levels and classes are texting in Arabizi. Its use online makes it highly visible and public, as opposed to older forms of dialect writing, which were largely private (71). Not only is it being used on personal social media profiles, but also on official company webpages (74). Arabizi is also moving into offline contexts, being seen in graffiti, flyers, and print ads on billboards or in magazines (74). And although ads which use Arabizi<\/span> are often advertising everyday products, some companies are now using Arabizi in advertisements for luxury products as well (75). It seems, then, that Arabizi may be allowing for writing in dialect to shed some of its long-held stigma.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Features of <\/b>Arabizi<\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

This alternative system of writing has not been standardized and was not imposed by a government or organization, but has been created by individual users (Davies 71, Vavichkina 198, 207). The lack of official writing rules may make Arabizi feel more accessible to people who do not feel confident in their ability to write in MSA or formal English or French (Davies 73). The frequency of Arabizi use versus Arabic script use depends on several factors, including where the user is located (its popularity may differ between regions), the user\u2019s personal preferences, and whether the user is frequently incorporating other languages into their messages (72). This is a fairly common occurrence, as in a survey of 248 Moroccan university students 97.1% mixed French and Moroccan Arabic, 77.7% mixed English and Moroccan Arabic, and 67.4% used all three languages (79). If a user is frequently including French or English words in their messages, then it may be easier to write everything with the Latin script rather than switch between keyboards and writing\/reading directions.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

The orthographic choices users make tend to differ from the official transliteration standards of the French colonial era (71-72). However, individual users may be influenced by French or English spelling standards. For example, someone who speaks English may write the Arabic word for \u2018thanks\u2019 as \u2018shukran\u2019, while someone who speaks French might write it \u2018chokran\u2019 (Davies 72, Vavichkina 203).<\/span><\/p>\n

The most prominent new orthographic feature in Arabizi may be the use of numbers to represent Arabic letters (72). Early phones combined the keyboard with the number pad. Using numbers to represent letters thus allowed users to type more quickly, since they had to push buttons fewer times (72). And it made sense to use numbers to stand in for some Arabic letters, because the numbers themselves had a visual resemblance to some letters. Numbers do not appear to be used for rebuses or other phonetic replacements, as sometimes occurs in English-speaking online contexts (\u2018gr8\u2019 for \u2018great\u2019, or \u20184\u2019 for \u2018for\u2019) (Vavichkina 202). However, use of numbers may be becoming less common with time; Vavichkina\u2019s 2021 study of 372 Arabizi comments on news videos found that users tended to use consonant clusters to represent sounds rather than their associated numeral (201-202). This may be due to technological shifts; smartphones now host numerals on a different keyboard than letters, requiring users to shift between the two.\u00a0\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Arabizi is essentially a transliteration of dialectal speech (198). As such, it preserves many of the features of Arabic dialect that differ from MSA. The case markers of MSA are dropped in Arabizi, as they are in Arabic dialects (203). Morphological elements, like the <\/span>b-\/ba-<\/span><\/i> prefix used in dialect for present tense verbs, are also used in Arabizi (205).\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Spelling is not standardized and largely phonetic (204). This can lead to a disconnect between related words, as MSA has highly formulaic ways of deriving words, meaning that readers can intuit a word\u2019s meaning by knowing the formula being used and the meaning associated with the root letters. Latinized spellings, in all their variety, can easily obscure these formulaic structures, potentially making it harder for readers to make connections between related words (204).\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Standard Arabic writing conventions are also disrupted by how Arabizi users treat glottal stops. Traditionally, no word in Arabic can start with a vowel; rather, words that start with a vowel actually start with a glottal stop. This is marked in the Arabic script. In Arabizi, however, users drop the glottal stop altogether and just start words with vowels (204). This phonetic spelling also allows users to add letters to words – specifically, the short vowels that usually go unmarked in texts written with the Arabic script (202).\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Factors Determining <\/b>Arabizi<\/i><\/b> Use<\/b><\/p>\n

Arabizi is considered to be an informal system of writing. The survey of Moroccan students found that it was most commonly used to communicate with friends or classmates, with texting and instant messaging being the most common contexts it was found in (Davies 75-76). Only 22% of the students used Arabizi in emails and, interestingly, only 31.5% used it for writing notes in class (76). Arabizi is therefore not simply for informal writing, but for informal writing in digital contexts.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Additionally, Arabizi use can depend on age, familiarity, and nationality. The surveyed students largely did not use Arabizi when communicating with people of their parents\u2019 generation or older (of the 36.4% who did, most used it to communicate with older family members) (76). This could be either due to gaps in comprehension – older people might not be as familiar with Arabizi – or because users see Arabizi as too informal (and therefore disrespectful) to use with older people. Considering that most of the students who did use Arabizi with older people were communicating with family members, whom they are more likely to be close with and therefore able to more easily flout expectations of respect with, I think this latter interpretation might make more sense.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

69% of students said they used Arabizi with peers whom they didn\u2019t know personally, with some students saying that using Arabizi with strangers would be impolite or disrespectful (76). Again, this points to the idea that Arabizi is not only informal but also may carry a sense of intimacy or familiarity that would be impolite or uncomfortable to impose on strangers.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Finally, 92.5% of the students reported using Arabizi only with other Moroccans, with the explanation that other Arabic speakers would not understand them (76). Considering that dialect can vary widely from country to country, and Moroccan Arabic is considered to be especially distinct, this explanation does make some sense. The use of Moroccan Arabic in general, whether written in the Arabic or Latin script, thus functions as a marker of identity. Just as with other dialectal writing online, using words specific to Moroccan dialect can also establish a sense of intimacy or familiarity with other users.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Why do individuals choose to use Arabizi? When the Moroccan students were asked about their motivations for using Arabizi, they listed several reasons. 85% of the students thought it allowed them to write more quickly, and 84% thought it was easier to write (77). Some thought it was easier to express their feelings in Arabizi (77). This is seemingly backed up by data from Vivichkina\u2019s study, which found that Arabizi comments tended \u201c<\/span>to express appreciation or emotion\u201d (201). The <\/span>Moroccan students also said using Arabizi made it easier to communicate – 79% of students thought Moroccan dialect was easier to read when it was written in the Latin script (Davies 78). It is easier to fully vocalize a text in the Latin script, after all (77-78). In fact, a fairly large percentage (61.3%) said they never wrote Moroccan Arabic with the Arabic script because \u201cthe result was incomprehensible\u201d(79).\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Of the Moroccan students, only 36.5% thought it largely was cool or fashionable, and only 32.5% saw it as a marker of identity (78). I assume that by \u2018marker of identity\u2019 they mean a marker of youth culture or of some other subculture. As I said above, the use of Arabizi with Moroccan dialect does most definitely invoke a Moroccan identity, since it is almost entirely being used only with other Moroccans. On the other hand, a 2018 study of Saudi youth found that they viewed Arabizi as \u201ccool and stylish\u201d and thus<\/span> \u201ca strong marker of Arab youth identity and group solidarity\u201d (Vavichkina 199). The same study found that youths thought using Arabizi made them stand out and allowed them to show off their knowledge of a foreign language like English (197). The ability to use non-standard orthography also shielded them from the embarrassment of making spelling mistakes (197). Clearly, motivations for using Arabizi differ depending on region.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Arabizi<\/i><\/b> versus Standard Arabic<\/b><\/p>\n

Arabic language media and the general public tend to view Arabizi negatively (Davies 80). They fear that it represents a loss of proficiency in or a simplification of MSA. But the Moroccan students voiced support for MSA (79). And, despite the fact that dialect and MSA tend to mix in daily speech, only 26.9% of the students said they mixed Moroccan Arabic and MSA in online communications (79). There seems to be a cultural resistance to using the Latin script to write MSA. Davies argues that rather than blurring the distinction between dialect and MSA, thus threatening MSA, the use of Arabizi actually makes a clear distinction between the two varieties through the use of two different scripts (79). In doing so, it can shield MSA from becoming simplified or being further influenced by English (Vavichkina 208). Arabizi can also act as an important tool for those of Middle Eastern heritage who live outside the region. They may be familiar with an Arabic dialect due to hearing family members speak it, but may not have received a formal Arabic education (Davies 81). Arabizi allows them to communicate with other Arabic-speakers despite this fact.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Final Thoughts<\/b><\/p>\n

Arabizi, as with other phenomena I\u2019ve looked at, is an informal writing system being used for interpersonal communication. Said system is largely influenced by spoken language rather than formal written varieties of language. However, further analysis will need to be done to better determine whether there are features of spoken language missing from Arabizi and other forms of Arabic used online and whether there are features specific to Standard Arabic present within Arabizi. Regional analysis might also be interesting to see if Arabizi differs dramatically from region to region (beyond the dialectal differences we expect). In any case, it\u2019s clear that analyzing Arabic as it exists in online contexts would make for some interesting results.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

References<\/b><\/p>\n

Davies, Eirlys. \u201cColloquial Moroccan Arabic: Shifts in Usage and Attitudes in the Era of\u00a0<\/span>Computer-Mediated Communication.\u201d <\/span>Language, Politics and Society in the Middle East:\u00a0<\/span><\/i>Essays in Honour of Yasir Suleiman<\/span><\/i>, edited by Yonatan Mendel and Abeer AlNajjar,\u00a0<\/span>Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh, 2018, pp. 69\u201389. <\/span>JSTOR<\/span><\/i>,\u00a0<\/span>www.jstor.org\/stable\/10.3366\/j.ctt1tqxb42.10<\/span><\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n

Vavichkina, Tatiana, Yulia Vlasova, and Elena Paymakova. “Present and Future of the Arabic Language Transliteration on the Internet (linguistic features of Arabizi).” <\/span>LINGUISTICA ANTVERPIENSIA, <\/span><\/i>2021, pp. 195-213.<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Much of the analysis of Arabic language usage on the internet has focused on Arabizi, the non-standardized system of writing Arabic with the Latin script (Davies 70). Although these papers largely focus on orthographic features of this system, they still … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1807,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[14],"tags":[45,46,47,8],"class_list":["post-38","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-weekly-post","tag-arabic","tag-arabizi","tag-orthography","tag-texting"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.smith.edu\/internetlinguistics2022\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/38","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.smith.edu\/internetlinguistics2022\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.smith.edu\/internetlinguistics2022\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.smith.edu\/internetlinguistics2022\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1807"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.smith.edu\/internetlinguistics2022\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=38"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/sites.smith.edu\/internetlinguistics2022\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/38\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":39,"href":"https:\/\/sites.smith.edu\/internetlinguistics2022\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/38\/revisions\/39"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.smith.edu\/internetlinguistics2022\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=38"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.smith.edu\/internetlinguistics2022\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=38"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.smith.edu\/internetlinguistics2022\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=38"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}