Language Attitudes of Iraqi Native Speakers of Arabic: a Sociolinguistic Investigation
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
LANGUAGE ATTITUDES OF IRAQI NATIVE SPEAKERS OF ARABIC: A SOCIOLINGUISTIC INVESTIGATION by Mohammed Kamil Murad Submitted to the Department of Linguistics and the Faculty of Graduate School of the University of Kansas In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master’s of Arts Committee: _____________________________ Chair: Arienne M. Dwyer _____________________________ Member: Naima Boussofara Omar _____________________________ Member: Harold Torrence Date Defended: April 19, 2007 The Thesis Committee certifies that this is the approved version of the following thesis: LANGUAGE ATTITUDES OF IRAQI NATIVE SPEAKERS OF ARABIC: A SOCIOLINGUISTIC INVESTIGATION Committee: _____________________________ Chair: Arienne M. Dwyer _____________________________ Member: Naima Boussofara Omar _____________________________ Member: Harold Torrence Date approved: May 1, 2007 ii ABSTRACT LANGUAGE ATTITUDES OF IRAQI NATIVE SPEAKERS OF ARABIC: A SOCIOLINGUISTIC INVESTIGATION by Mohammed K. Murad Chairperson of the Supervisory Committee: Professor Arienne M. Dwyer Department of Anthropology This study investigates language attitudes of Iraqi native speakers of Arabic towards two Arabic varieties in Iraq, Standard Arabic (SA) and Iraqi Arabic (IA). The sample of the study comprises 196 participants divided into 107 college students and 89 non-students with no post-secondary degree. The instrument used in the study is a language survey of 44 questions falling into five groups, language preference and use in social interaction, language preference in media, language preference and use in the academic domain, language ideology, and Open-ended questions. The findings showed that the differences in language attitudes between students and non-students were significant, i.e. students showed more favorable attitudes towards SA than IA, whereas non-students overwhelmingly preferred IA. No significant gender-based differences were found among participants. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to express my deep gratitude to Dr. Arienne Dwyer for her invaluable guidance, advice, and encouragement. Her meticulous editing, ideas, and suggestions were a great source of inspiration and help. My deep appreciation also goes to Dr. Naima Omar for her support and guidance. The comments she made and the references she recommended were of significant importance for this research. I owe much to Dr. Harold Torrence for his sharp comments and suggestions. His invaluable insights, continuous encouragement, and constructive criticism made this study better than it would have been otherwise. I would like to take this opportunity to express my thanks to Dr. Patricia Hawley for teaching me important concepts in statistics that helped me perform the statistical analyses in this research. Sitting as a student in Hawley’s statistics class was a great experience through which I learned a great deal of interesting and invaluable information. To Geoff Husic, I owe special thanks for his incredible assistance especially in time of difficulty. He has been overwhelmingly generous with his time and support. Geoff’s detailed reviewing of my writing contributed valuably to this work. I am also grateful to Dr. Neil Salkind for his useful advice and help. I am not less grateful to Dr. Mark Nesbitt-Daly who has reviewed my writing and generously offered a very helpful and constructive input. iv I am very much indebted to my close friend Thaer Jawad. Thaer did a wonderful and remarkable contribution in the data-collection process. Without Thaer’s assistance, completing this research would have been practically impossible. I am much indebted to Julie Steinbach for her great cooperation in coding and entering the data into Excel and SPSS. Without her help, I would have spent much more time working on my data. To Wendy Herd, I would like to express my gratitude for her valuable assistance and helpful suggestions. Of the many others to whom I am indebted and owe gratitude, I would like to mention Mickey Waxman, Jeffrey Lewis, Sara Kanning, and Kathy Pribbenow from the Instructional Services in the University of Kansas. They lectured excellent series of workshops that deal with various technical issues of high importance for any student doing graduate research. My love and gratitude also goes to the University of Kansas for embracing me as a graduate student for two years. My experience at the University of Kansas will be memorable for many years to come. I would like to express thanks to the faculty of the Department of Linguistics where I learned immeasurable and interesting information about language and language research. Finally, I would like to thank my parents, sisters, and brothers for their love and support. v DEDICATION To my family and all my friends who are caught in the violence that turned Iraq into a battlefield. vi CONTENTS ABSTRACT.................................................................................................................iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS......................................................................................... iv DEDICATION............................................................................................................. vi CONTENTS................................................................................................................ vii LIST OF TABLES........................................................................................................ x LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................... xii CHAPTER ONE ........................................................................................................... 1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Purpose................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Research Questions............................................................................................. 2 1.3 Structure of Study ............................................................................................... 3 CHAPTER TWO .......................................................................................................... 4 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE .............................................................................. 4 2.1 What is Attitude? ................................................................................................ 4 2.2 Language Attitude and its Importance................................................................ 5 2.3 Standard Arabic vs. Iraqi Arabic ...................................................................... 10 2.4 Arabic variation and attitudes in the Arab World............................................. 16 2.4 Educational Level and Language Attitude........................................................ 25 2.5 Language and Gender ....................................................................................... 32 2.6 Language Attitudes: General Trends ................................................................ 33 CHAPTER THREE .................................................................................................... 37 METHODOLOGY ..................................................................................................... 37 3.1 Research Hypothesis and Variables.................................................................. 37 3.2 Participants........................................................................................................ 38 3.3 Survey ............................................................................................................... 40 vii 3.3.1 First Group: Social Interaction................................................................... 40 3.3.2 Second Group: Language Preference in Media ......................................... 41 3.3.3 Third Group: Language in Education ........................................................ 42 3.3.4 Fourth Group: Language Ideology............................................................. 43 3.3.5 Fifth Group: Open-ended Questions.......................................................... 43 3.4 Procedures......................................................................................................... 44 3.5 Analysis of the Data.......................................................................................... 45 CHAPTER FOUR....................................................................................................... 47 RESULTS ................................................................................................................... 47 4.1 Language Preference......................................................................................... 50 4.2 Language Use.................................................................................................... 52 4.3 Language Preference and Gender ..................................................................... 54 4.4 Language Use and Gender................................................................................ 56 4.5 Student Majors.................................................................................................. 58 4.5.1 Language Preference according to Student Majors ................................... 58 4.5.2 Language Use according to Student Majors .............................................. 60 4.6 Language Ideology...........................................................................................