Probing linguistic change in Arabic vernaculars: A sociohistorical perspective

Abstract

It is received wisdom in variationist sociolinguistics that linguistic and social factors go hand in hand in structuring variability in language and any consequent instances of language change. We address the complexity of such factors by exploring data from several Arabic dialects in the eastern Arab world. We demonstrate that language change does not always follow expected phonological trajectories, even in cases where older changes are reconstructed to have operated along so-called universal patterns. In our explanation of recent changes in these dialects, we emphasise the role of social motivations for language change and the interactions between these social constraints and purely linguistic ones. Our analysis of change is supported by historical accounts of variation and change in Arabic. We illustrate how general principles of sociolinguistic theory apply to the Arabic data and provide additional layers of sociolinguistic information that highlight the importance of diverse data for evaluating cross-linguistic generalisations. (Arabic, language change, historical sociolinguistics)

Styles, standards and meaning

“…When taking the ecological particularities of each Arabic dialect into account, we see similar gender patterns in Arabic-speaking communities to those found in the classic sociolinguistic studies of English (e.g. Al-Wer et al 2020). For centuries, the rapidly narrowing gender inequality in access to literacy in the Middle East limited women's access to written forms, but its impact on the core elements of variationist sociolinguistics is questionable at best.…”

Accommodation Patterns in the Speech of Arabic-Speaking Children and Adolescents: A Variationist Analysis

“…Limited accommodation, and indeed variation (cf. Al-Wer et al 2022), in the realization of this variable may be due to the complex phonological conditioning involved in its urban realization, compared to the simple rule of no raising that applies in the local dialect. Kerswill (1995) explains that complex dialect features require early exposure for complete acquisition, and Miller (2005) observes that a high degree of difference between contact varieties complicates the process of accommodation.…”

“…As noted in the introduction above, the variable (-a), which represents the morphophonological ending of feminine nouns and adjectives in Arabic, is realized as [a] in Bedouin dialects, including the local dialect of the speech community, but is primarily raised to [e] in many urban and rural dialects of the Levant (Al-Wer 2007;Al-Wer et al 2022). The raised urban realization is considered a characteristic feature of major urban centres in the levant such as Damascus (Lentin 2007), Amman (Al-Wer 2007), Beirut (Naïm 2007), and Jerusalem (Rosenhouse 2007).…”

“…Raising may also be inhibited in the environment of /ɾ/, e.g., [le:ɾa] 'Syrian currency' (Durand 2011). Despite being viewed as a supralocal feature (Milroy et al 1994) that is gaining ground in the region (Al-Wer et al 2022), phonological conditioning that governs the raising of (-a) in Urban dialects is expected to hinder its acquisition and advancement in the community as it makes it a complex feature (Chambers 1992;Kerswill 1996).…”

“…The raised urban realization is considered a characteristic feature of major urban centres in the levant such as Damascus (Lentin 2007), Amman (Al-Wer 2007), Beirut (Naïm 2007), and Jerusalem (Rosenhouse 2007). Raising of the variable, which is known as imala in Arabic (Al-Wer et al 2022), is phonologically conditioned in urban Levantine varieties, whereby it is inhibited in the environment of back constants (pharyngeal, glottal, emphatics, and post-velars) which favour a low vowel (Versteegh 2001;Al-Wer 2007;Habib 2012). As such, while [e] is considered the default variant in Urban Levantine dialects, [a] is used in environments that inhibit raising, e.g., /wARAqA/ 'paper' would not exhibit final imala and would be realized as [waRPa] in Urban varieties.…”