Covering linguistic variability in Arabic: A language ideological exercise in terminology
In this article a series of Arabic terms that refer to language variability will be discussed. The basic principle of the analysis is that these terms are explicitly or implicitly informed by language ideological attitudes concerning linguistic variability in Arabic in which a diglossic division is taken for granted. Because of its common-sense and taken-for-granted nature, (language) ideology tends to be located much more in the unsaid than in what is overtly voiced. At first sight, linguistic terminology might seem straightforward and explicit. However, especially if the terms involved are commonly used, they tend to cover a set of shared attitudes toward language and language use. A study of the terminology regarding language variability, then, can be very productive in uncovering implicit assumptions concerning linguistic variability in the Arab-speaking world. We will focus on the early Islamic era and the end of the 19th century as crucial pivotal periods in the development of both language and linguistic terminology, as our basic assumption is that the semantic and ideological load of linguistic terms evolves in parallel with important social and political changes. The article will conclude with a preliminary exploration of recent terminological developments related to computer mediated communication (CMC).
In this article I will discuss a range of Arabic terms that refer to linguistic variability. The basic assumption of the analysis is that these terms are explicitly or implicitly informed by language ideological attitudes concerning linguistic variability in Arabic in which a diglossic division is taken for granted. Elsewhere I have argued that diglossia describes the ways in which linguistic variability is interpreted in the Arabic linguistic community rather than the ways in which it is produced. Nevertheless, even if actual language use defies the functional diglossic dichotomy in several ways, diglossia in its language ideological dimension is very persuasive and fits well with how most native speakers of Arabic perceive linguistic variability in Arabic (Daniëls 2018; see also Eid 2002, 204; Suleiman 2008, 28; Suleiman 2011a, 29–31). One of the characteristics of ideology is its shared or “common-sense” nature, meaning that ideological assumptions are most often taken for granted: “The common-sense (basic/normative) nature of ideological meaning is manifested in the fact that it is rarely questioned, in a given society or community, in discourse related to the ‘reality’ in question, possibly across various discourse genres” (Verschueren 2012, 12). Because of this “common-sense-ness”, ideology tends to be located much more in the unsaid than in what is overtly voiced. Yet an exercise in terminology covering language variability, however explicit it may seem, can be very fertile in uncovering these unexpressed common-sense assumptions concerning linguistic variability in the Arabic-speaking world, certainly if the terms involved are commonly used: