Sociolinguistic ISSN: 1750-8649 (print) Studies ISSN: 1750-8657 (online) Article

Arabic terms revisited: The rural and urban context of North-Western

Amina Naciri-Azzouz

Abstract This article reports on a study that focuses on the different kinship terms collected in several places in north-western Morocco, using elicitation and interviews conducted between March 2014 and June 2015 with several dozens of informants aged between 8 and 80. The analysed data include terms from the urban contexts of the city of Tetouan, but most of them were gathered in rural locations: the small village of Bni Ḥlu (Fahs-Anjra province) and different places throughout the coastal and inland regions of Ghomara ( province). The corpus consists of terms of address, terms of reference and some hypocoristic and affective terms.

KEYWORDS: KINSHIP TERMS, TERMS OF ADDRESS, VARIATION, DIALECTOLOGY, MOROCCAN (DARIJA)

Affiliation

University of Zaragoza, Spain email: [email protected]

SOLS VOL 12.2 2018 185–208 https://doi.org/10.1558/sols.35639 © 2019, EQUINOX PUBLISHING 186 SOCIOLINGUISTIC STUDIES

1 Introduction

The impact of migration ‒ attributable to multiple and diverse factors depending on the period ‒ is clearly noticeable in northern Morocco. Migratory movements from the east to the west, from rural areas to urban centres, as well as to Europe, has resulted in a shifting rural and urban population in this region. Furthermore, issues such as the increasing rate of urbanization and the drop in mortality have altered the social and spatial structure of cities such as Tetouan and , where up to the present time some districts are known by the name of the origin of the population who settled down there: e.g. l-ḥawma dǝ-rwāfa ‘the Riffian quarter’, in reference to Riffians from the Berber-speaking Rif.1 One of the immediate results of internal migration is contact between speakers of different varieties of and even other languages. The outcome of dialect contact can be linguistic change, which not only results in levelling towards the prestigious variety, but also in the emergence of new varieties and new linguistic practices (Miller, 2007:7). The latest linguistic research on north- western Morocco highlights levelling and linguistic change phenomena, though a systematic analysis is still pending. For instance, Vicente (2009) already points to the emergence of a new urban variety in the Arabic-speaking city of Tetouan. The purpose of this article is to discuss Arabic kinship terms in north-western Morocco, in particular in the region known as Jbala, including Ghomara,2 shown in Map 1. I focus on variation between the countryside and the city, as well as between younger and older people, in order to formulate a response to the follow- ing major question: How is dialect contact, in itself a result of socio-economic changes taking place in north-western Morocco, affecting kinship terms?

Map 1. Traditional tribal map (Vignet-Zunz, 1995:2).

ARABIC KINSHIP TERMS IN RURAL / URBAN MOROCCO 187

This article argues, through a dialectological and sociolinguistic analysis of kinship terms and their system of address, that kinship terms are affected by linguistic change in progress in two directions: 1) a shift to more prestigious variants, and 2) the loss and simplification of the use of kinship terms. Sections 2 and 3 describe kinship terms in Morocco and where and how data were recorded. The following section (section 4), divided into nine subsections, discusses kinship terms and their uses – including terms of reference, terms of address and their variation, as well as hypocoristic forms and affective terms – in an urban context, namely in Tetouan and the Spanish autonomous city of Ceuta,3 and a rural context, namely in Bni Ḥlu, in the province of Fahs-Anjra and in several locations along the coast and inland of Ghomara, in the province of Chefchaouen. Section 5 contains the conclusions of the study, presenting some evaluative remarks.

2 Research on kinship in Morocco

Research on kinship in Morocco to elucidate social structures is particularly profuse. From Robertson-Smith (1885) and Montagne (1930) onwards, kinship has been considered the principle of social organization in North Africa and the Middle East (Aixelà, 2000:60).4 Consequently, the abundant literature produced throughout the 20th century focused on describing and defining Moroccan social structures around , as ‘family and kinship are the cornerstones of society, its main structural elements’ (González Vázquez, 2010:365; my translation). From the seventies on, some theories frame social change along the lines of nuclearization, with reference to the process of transition from an to a nuclear one being a direct result of the rapid urbanization of Morocco and to explain the developments in Moroccan society in the context of a new nation- state. In this regard, see, for example, work by scholars such as Fatima Mernissi (cf. Aixelà, 2000:82–85). Mateo Dieste (2013) reviews the concept of nuclearization and applies it to the case of transnational northern Moroccan in order to demonstrate how the process of nuclear homes does not necessarily mean a weakening of kinship ties. Dieste (2013:417; my translation) accepts the fact that ‘a process of nuclearization of the families’ residence has indeed taken place […] though this transformation, mainly in terms of space, has not necessarily involved a reduction in the weight of lineages and of the extended family in key matters such as and the economic subsistence of the unit’. In the case of Morocco, studies of nuclear homes are predominant over those of nuclear families in the literature. González Vázquez (2010:406–419) for example applies this approach in the case of Jbala, where ‘[…] the most frequent

188 SOCIOLINGUISTIC STUDIES factors which may have had an impact on the formation of nuclear homes are migrations, the death of certain members of the family unit, the incorporation of certain family members into wage-earning jobs, demographic pressure, poverty and conflicts’. The purpose of this article is not to investigate the consequences of the above transformations on family structure and relations in terms of power and solidarity, but rather to use the concept of nuclearization in order to explain some uses of kinship terms, particularly terms of address, since the formation of nuclear homes has reduced contacts between some members of the family, and consequently some kinship terms linked to respect, solidarity and affection may have been reduced, as will be shown in section 4.

3 Corpus and methodology

The data that were collected for this study originate from different locations in north-western Morocco (see Map 2).5 The Arabic spoken in this region belongs to a no-Hilali type. In Moroccan Arabic (also known as Darija) two strata of Arabic have been identified from a historical perspective: the non-Hilali (or pre-Hilali) sedentary Arabic that came about in different periods from the first arabicization wave starting in the 17th century; and the Hilali dialects or Bedouin dialects linked to the arrival of the Bānū Hilāl, Bānū Maʕqīl and Bānū Sulaym Bedouin tribes from the 12th century. North-western Morocco dialects are grouped within non- Hilali dialects and can be divided into urban dialects, such as the traditional urban dialects of Tangiers and Tetouan, also called Mdini dialects, and rural dialects, known as Jebli dialects. Nowadays, they would all shape the so-called l-haḍṛa š- šamāliyya, that is, the western ‘northern variety’ (cf. Sánchez and Vicente, 2012). The corpus was compiled through elicitation, semi-structured interviews, spontaneous conversations and participant observation. To achieve this, I stayed in the region on different occasions from March 2014 to June 2015 within the framework of my doctoral thesis on Ghomara Arabic varieties. Most often I stayed in family homes and was therefore able to witness the use of kinship terms within different contexts. A significant part of the corpus was recorded in different locations of Ghomara, in the province of Chefchaouen, which is made up of a group of nine tribes situ- ated east of Tetouan between the rivers Laou and Ouringa. On the Mediterranean coast, data were recorded in Qāʕ Asrās, a coastal village 55 kilometres from Tetouan in the rural commune of (abbreviated TI on Map 2; see here below). In this case, data were provided by an extended family living in indepen- dent dwellings on the same plot of land (see Table 1). This family consisted specifically of two elderly living alone in one house, and five who

ARABIC KINSHIP TERMS IN RURAL / URBAN MOROCCO 189 had built their respective houses on the same plot of land; one other was living in another rural commune and one lived in Tetouan. Furthermore, many of their neighbours are family relations, the entire family having moved to the plain, ḷūṭa, from somewhere up in the mountains in the early 20th century. In Tables 1 to 6 (see here below), I present the informants whose speech I recorded during the sessions of elicitation.

Table 1. Social profile of the informants from Tizgane (TI).

Informants Age Educational level TI 1 ~ 77-year-old man Illiterate TI 2 ~ 60-year-old woman Illiterate TI 3 ~ 53-year-old man Quran school TI 4 ~ 38-year-old woman Illiterate TI 5 ~ 33-year-old man Primary school TI 6 18-year-old woman University student TI 7 15-year-old man Student TI 8 8-year-old Student

Inland, I recorded data in the rural communes of Bni Selmane and (abbreviated respectively BS and BB on Map 2; see here below). In Bni Selmane (see Table 2) I compiled data from a čar close to Khmis M’diq ‒ čar is the name given to the most elementary dwelling units in the zone ‒ where the model of the extended family is the rule. In fact, almost all the neighbouring families are related. In this case it concerns a larger family of three generations living in the same small village, though each family is relatively independent. Finally, in Bab Berred (see Table 3) I recorded data in Akumsan, where the situation was similar to that of Bni Selmane.

Table 2. Social profile of the informants from Bni Selmane (BS).

Informants Age Educational level BS1 ~ 70-year-old woman Illiterate BS2 ~ 70-year-old man Illiterate BS3 ~ 50-year-old woman Illiterate BS4 37-year-old man Quran school BS5 22-year-old woman Illiterate BS6 22-year-old man Quran school BS7 19-year-old woman Illiterate BS8 13-year-old woman Primary school

190 SOCIOLINGUISTIC STUDIES

Table 3. Social profile of the informants from Bab Berred (BB).

Informants Age Educational level BB1 43-year-old woman Illiterate BB2 45-year-old man Illiterate BB3 ~ 60-year-old woman Illiterate BB4 38-year-old man Illiterate BB5 21-year-old woman Primary school BB6 19-year-old man Student BB7 8-year-old woman Student

Anjra (abbreviated as A on Map 2) is the other rural region from which data were compiled, in this case mostly through elicitation, as my stay there was brief (see Table 4). Data were collected in the village of Bni Ḥlu, about 25 kilometres west of Tetouan from within an extended family in a traditional dwelling with shared quarters.

Table 4. Social profile of the informants from Anjra (A).

Informants Age Educational level A1 ~ 70-year-old woman Illiterate A2 35-year-old woman Primary school A3 31-year-old woman Primary school A4 29-year-old woman Primary school

The situation in cities is rather different as nuclear dwellings are the most common there. Data were collected in the city of Tetouan (abbreviated as T on Map 2), mostly from the dwellings of nuclear families (see Table 5). These families are of rural origin and had been living in Tetouan for decades. Other data came from Mdini families whose origins lie in the city. Although this is how they identify themselves, the linguistic differences are not all that obvious. This fact is relevant because some of the older family members maintain some features of the Jebli dialect. This results in vast diaphasic variation. Some elderly men and women use the traditional Mdini variety from the city of Tetouan ‒ its most distinctive features being the glottal realization [ʔ] of /q/ and the alveolar approximant [ɹ] of /r/; others maintain rural features ‒ such as the spirantization of dentals. However, the majority uses the new urban variety which does not keep the most distinctive features of the Mdini or Jebli varieties.

ARABIC KINSHIP TERMS IN RURAL / URBAN MOROCCO 191

Table 5. Social profile of the informants from Tetouan (T).

Informants Age Educational level T1 73-year-old man Secondary school T2 67-year-old man Higher education T3 62-year-old woman Primary school T4 57-year-old woman Illiterate T5 43-year-old man Higher education T6 36-year-old man Higher education T7 33-year-old woman Secondary school T8 26-year-old woman Secondary school T9 13-year-old man Student T10 9-year-old child Student

Finally, though my stay in Ceuta (abbreviated C on Map 2) was brief, I succeeded in collecting some data amongst elderly people of Moroccan background born in the city (see Table 6).

Map 2. La région de Tanger-Tétouan-. Monographie générale:4 (Ministère de l’Intérieur, Direction Générale des Collectivités Locales, 2015).

192 SOCIOLINGUISTIC STUDIES

Table 6. Social profile of the informants from Ceuta (C).

Informants Age Educational level C1 59-year-old woman Primary school C2 68-year-old man Vocational training

Thus, the data discussed below have been collected in spontaneous conversations, semi-structured individual, group interviews and participant observation. In addition, elicitation was used in Ceuta and Anjra since my stay was short in these two places. Elicitation was also necessary in order to verify some uses of kinship terms in Ghomara and Tetouan. A digital recorder was used for recording. The data were extracted from conversations on different topics, not only those on kinship terms, since this allowed the analysis of interactions between family members and the kinship terms used therein. Kinship terms were transcribed phonologically, and were analysed taking into account internal variation (i.e. rural vs. urban context) and variation observed through age. This indicates that linguistic change is in progress, although in the case of Ghomara this change is at a very early stage (cf. Naciri-Azzouz, 2016). This has led to the observation that apparently most distinctive Jeblie features are being lost in the context of a process of levelling towards the prestigious variety, i.e. the Tetouan-Tangiers variety, as has been observed in other regions of Jbala (cf. Vicente, 2002:339–340; Moscoso, 2003:218). In this context, I use the age variable in an attempt to discuss changes related to the loss of some kinship terms in rural and urban contexts despite the inconvenience of an apparent time approach (cf. Eckert, 1996:151–167; Al-Wer, 2009:627–639; etc.). Nevertheless, age is certainly not the only variable to consider, since there are other significant variables as well, such as education and social practices, that contribute to the social changes taking place in north-western Morocco.

4 Kinship terms

Research on Arabic kinship terms has focused on different dialects, such as Syrian and (Davies, 1949) and (Piamenta, 1989), amongst others; and has taken different approaches, e.g. from semantic perspec- tives (Cuisenier and Miquel, 1965). Many recent studies, however, concentrate on terms and forms of address, as ‘in many languages K[inship] T[erms] constitute a fundamental part of the nominal address repertory’ (Braun, 1988:298). In this domain, the literature has become significantly more profuse, though work mainly focuses on Middle Eastern : one of the first papers was by Ayoub (1964) on bi-polarity (or address inversion)6 of kinship terms in a

ARABIC KINSHIP TERMS IN RURAL / URBAN MOROCCO 193

Lebanese village; later came a doctoral thesis on terms of address in (Yassin, 1975). There then followed Parkinson’s work on (1985) and Farghal and Shakir’s paper (1994) on Jordanian, amongst others. As for kinship terms in the Maghreb, especially in Morocco, some studies focused on terminology both in Berber7 and in Arabic, from anthropologist David Montgomery Hart (1976:203–216) to linguist Georges Séraphin Colin (1999:59– 65). Dominique Caubet and Zakia Iraqui-Sinaceur present unpublished manu- scripts by Colin with a remarkable paper on kinship that compiles 38 terms that were in use in the city of Tangiers in the 1920s, plus particularly relevant papers on Moroccan Arabic hypocoristic forms (Caubet and Iraqui-Sinaceur, 1999:67– 78), and some interesting kinship terms in child speech (Caubet and Iraqui- Sinaceur, 1999:79–110). Geertz (1979) produced a list of kinship terms recorded in the city of Sefrou, and though he highlighted noticeable variations in his introduction, these were not reflected later on in his text. Jeffrey Heath’s (2002:78–83, 267–268, 400–430) Jewish and Muslim Dialects of Moroccan Arabic emphasises the peculiar nature of kinship vocabulary in Moroccan Arabic, stressing its irregularity and variability, and producing a comprehensive analysis of some kinship terms. However, terms regarding in-laws are not dealt with. Regarding research on terms of address in Moroccan Arabic, especially focusing on kinship terms, no comprehensive analysis has been produced so far on any of the different Moroccan varieties. Some remarkable references are made by Fatima Sadiqi (2003:68–71) who, from the viewpoint of gender, analyses some terms which display tension between -in-law and daughter-in-law. Herrero Muñoz-Cobo (2008) studies some forms of address in Tetouan and, finally, Potter (1995) focuses on terms depicted in the 1982 film Dmūʕ n-ndǝm ‘Tears of regret’, by the filmmaker Hassan Moufti, set in the city of Fes.

4.1 Kinship terms in north-western Morocco As pointed out above, most of this corpus was recorded in a rural context where relations and contact amongst different family members and other neighbours usually take place on a daily basis, particularly amongst groups of women and men working together in farming or agricultural jobs. The situation in the city of Tetouan is, however, quite different, and while statistics are not available in this respect, contact is not as frequent amongst family members, though, of course, this depends on many variables. This shall be pointed out where necessary. I next deal with formal aspects of kinship terms without referring to phonetic variation typical of the different rural and urban varieties. Thus, vowel length has

194 SOCIOLINGUISTIC STUDIES been noted despite the debate on vowel length in north-western Morocco (cf. Behnstedt and Benabbou, 2002; Heath, 2002; Aguadé, 2003; amongst others) and the absence of a comprehensive study of vowels so far. One of the most peculiar aspects of kinship terms to be taken into account is its synthetic genitive construction, a synthetic form of expressing possession. In the case of northern dialects, this genitive construction is commonly used with possessive suffixes, since a tendency to use analytic constructions exists.8 This situation is well attested in Jebli dialects: ʕammt-a ‘her ’s ’; ḍ-ḍāṛ dyāl-u ‘his house’ (Colin, 1921:73; Lévi-Provençal, 1922:37; Vicente, 2000:139; Heath, 2002:463–464; Moscoso, 2003:156; Guerrero Parrado, 2015:157). In addition, the use of a double genitive marking ‒ a combination of a synthetic and an analytic construction with the genitival prepositions d- or dyāl ‒ clarifies or emphasises who the possessor is:

(1) ma-ši yǝmmā-hǝm d-ūlād-u NEG mother-3PL of-sons-3S ‘She is not the mother of his sons’

In my analysis, I present the different uses of kinship terms looking into their variations, starting with variations referring to the and then moving on to the extended family and other relatives. For each term I point out which is the reference term, which is the address term and, in contexts where their use has been noted, I analyse whether differences occur between the city and the country. The kinship terms are presented in the following subsections 4.1.1 to 4.1.9. They are presented in the ways they are commonly used. Those that are accom- panied by a first singular suffix pronoun -i or -y are presented that way.

4.1.1 ‘Mother’ mamma, yǝmma, m9a"m9a, l-wal īda Four variants have been located in each of the places that were visited though frequency of use and contexts differ between rural and urban zones. On the coast of Ghomara, the term yǝmma ‒ used mainly by adults and elderly people ‒ coexists with mamma ~ ṃaṃṃa used by younger people. As Caubet (1993:4) pointed out, the emphatic realisation of ṃ, and also of ḅ occurs in words expressing great affection or in insults. For some, yǝmma is used to refer to ‘the father’s mother’. In inland Ghomara, however, yǝmma is most common, even amongst youths. In Anjra, the situation is slightly different as the most common term is ṃaṃṃa, though yǝmma is maintained amongst older people.

ARABIC KINSHIP TERMS IN RURAL / URBAN MOROCCO 195

All these terms are actually used in Tetouan but their usages depend on each family where the age variable plays an important role. In Ceuta, where only two informants over 60 years old were available, both use yǝmma. In Tetouan and amongst young people in the countryside, the most frequent term is mamma ~ ṃaṃṃa. yǝmma continues to be used only by older people and occasionally refers to the father’s mother who usually lives with the family or who is very close to them. Also, the use of ṃāṃa (and the corresponding form ḅāḅa), always emphatic, appears to have expanded and is not only used by the youngest, but even among 20-year olds. Heath (2002:404) pointed in his earlier research to the scant presence of the word in Tetouan, but it has probably expanded due to the influence of the media, since ṃāṃa is more common in Moroccan Arabic as it is spoken in the -Casa region. In addition, one informant points to a variable linked to social class:

(2) ṃāṃa ka-yʔūl-u-ha n-nās d-ǝl-flūs, hāyda mpǝẓẓʕīn MUM PV-3-say\IPFV-PL-OBJ.3F the-people of-the-money like this snobs ‘ṃāṃa is what people of means say, stuck-up snobs’ (62 year-old woman from Tetouan, T2)

All these terms coexist in each of the locations, except in inland Ghomara where yǝmma is the most widespread. mamma and yǝmma may be used as terms of address and terms of reference, though generally yǝmma is preferred when referring to someone else’s mother both in Tetouan and its rural region: i.e. yǝmma-h ‘his mother’, yǝmma-ha d-Lamye ‘Lamya’s mother’ are more frequent than mamma-k ‘your mother’ or mamma-kum ‘your (PL) mother’. mamma and yǝmma are always used with a synthetic genitival construction: yǝmma-ha ‘her mother’; yǝmma-na ‘our mother’, as well as with double genitive marking,9 hiyya yǝmma-hǝm d-hād ǝl-ʕyāl ‘she is the mother of these children’. ṃaṃṃa-k ‘your mother’, ṃaṃṃa-hum ‘their mother’, etc. are used too, and with double genitive marking: ṃaṃṃa-h d-Muḥammad ‘Muḥammad’s mother’. Conversely, l-walīda ‘the mother’, a more standard and thus formal term, is only used as a term of reference (and it never occurs in the synthetic genitive), but it may be used in an emphatic or sarcastic sense as a term of address: for instance, in our corpus, a son (T9) asking his mother for something:

(3) a-l-walīda, ʕṭī-ni lli qul-t l-ǝk! VOC-the-mother give\IMP.2S-to-1S REL say\PFV-1S to-you ‘Mother, please give me what I had asked for!’

196 SOCIOLINGUISTIC STUDIES

4.1.2 ‘‘Father’ b9b9a, ba"ba ḅḅa and bāba are the most common terms. In rural zones bāba is more common, though ḅḅa is increasingly used by the youngest. I have noted several uses of bāba in Tetouan, particularly amongst older people and not only of rural origin. While forms such as ḅḅa and ṃaṃṃa used to be linked to young people, their use is widespread in Tetouan, and they tend to become the frequent variant in some coastal villages amongst young people. This situation may be explained by the continued use in adulthood of hypocoristic forms used in childhood (Caubet and Iraqui-Sinaceur, 1999:59). As is the case with yǝmma and mamma, both terms referring to may be used as terms of reference and of address. Furthermore, they always take the synthetic construction, e.g. bāba-na ‘our father’, ḅḅa-hum ‘their father’, or double marking possession, e.g. huwwa bāba-h d-rāžl-i ‘he is my ’s father’.

4.1.3 ‘‘Sister’ xti pl. xwa"ta"ti and‘‘’ xa"y pl. xu"t, xwa"t xti ‘sister’ and xāy ‘brother’ are used in rural and urban contexts generally as terms of reference and address. Sometimes, xūti d-dkūra ‘my male ’ and xūti lāntāt ‘my female siblings’ are used to differentiate plurals by sex. Both terms may have a fictive inversion use: they may serve to address friends or a person of the same age whose name is unknown, both for solidarity purposes and to convey closeness. In Ghomara some terms of affection are used to address older siblings. In Bni Selmane and Bab Berred, ʕǝzzi is used for the older brother and nǝnna for the older sister; both terms are also found in Ghomara Berber with the same sense (Mourigh, 2016:121). These affection terms, ʕǝzzi and nǝnna, may also be used to address other family members such as and who are close to the speaker. I have found these terms used within the structure of an extended family where there are are very close relationships with the father’s . As these are not actually kinship terms, the concept of fictive inversion may not apply here. In Tangiers in the 1920s, Colin (1999:100) registered the use of ʕazzi with a quite different sense: ‘titre, que par politesse, l’on fait précéder le nom des nègres âgés lorsqu’on les interpelle’. This is a euphemistic form of the root {ʕzz} meaning ‘a strong, loved person’ which was used to refer to black slaves (de Prémare, Canamas, Comerro, Dallaporta and Ealet, 1996:IX/98).10 At present ʕǝzzi is the most widespread form in Morocco for a black person and usually with a derogatory meaning. In Ghomara, however, it does not have a derogatory connotation and it is even a term of affection.

ARABIC KINSHIP TERMS IN RURAL / URBAN MOROCCO 197

nanna ~ nǝnna is also found by Colin (1921:116) in Branes (), to refer to the father’s . In Heath (2002:80) the same term refers to ‘grandmother’ and is linked to Moroccan Arabic spoken by Berber-speakers. nanna is a Berber loanword of Romance origin and can be polysemic in the different Berber varieties; for example, in Kabyle it may refer to an older sister or an (Dallet, 1982:536). Both ʕǝzzi and nǝnna are exclusively used as terms of address. The term which clearly states the family relationship is preferred, for instance, xāy or xti, and both of them take the synthetic genitival construction, e.g. xa-hǝm ‘their brother’, xt-u ‘her sister’, or double marking possession, e.g. xt-a dyāl-a ‘her sister’. xti reflexes irregularity when it takes a synthetic genitival construction with plural possessives suffixes:

SG: xt-i ‘my sister’ PL: xǝt-na ~ ǝxt-na ‘our sister’ xt-ǝk ‘your sister’ xǝt-kum ~ ǝxt-kum ‘your sister’ xt-u ‘his sister’ xt-um ‘their sister’ xt-a ‘her sister’

Through elicitation it showed that informants tend to use a form xwāt-na with genitival construction and l-xūt dyān-na ‘our ’ with an analytical one. The form ʔuxt has only been attested in Tetouan in an analytic genitival construction: l-ʔuxt dyān-na. In Qāʕ Asrās, diminutives such as ʕzīzi are found, to address a brother, not necessary an older brother, and its feminine counterpart xtīti with the reduplication of the feminine morpheme t. These names have apparently fallen into disuse since I have not observed their use among youngsters; even those who are still using them claim that they are not used anymore:

(4) šʕāl hāḏi na-n-ʕayyǝṭ: “¡a-ʕzīzi!”, ma how many DEM PV-1S-call\IPFV VOC- ʕzīzi NEG ka-y-simm-īw-ah-ši, ka-y-ḥǝšm-u, “a-xtīti” PV-3-name\IPFV-PL-OBJ.3S-NEG PV-3-be embarrassed\IPFV-PL VOC-xtīti ‘Long ago they called: “a-ʕzīzi!”, they did not call by name, they were embarrassed to, “a-xtīti!”’ (38 year-old woman, TI4)

198 SOCIOLINGUISTIC STUDIES

As in the case of ʕǝzzi and nǝnna in inland Ghomara, these names are also used as respectful and affectionate terms to address other family members or next of kin. In de Prémare, Canamas, Comerro, Dallaporta and Ealet (ʕzīzi: 1996:IX/99, meaning 4; xtīti 1994:IV/181–182) several uses are attested. Herrero Muñoz- Cobo (2008:102) attests both terms amongst women from Jbala in Tetouan to refer to older siblings. Colin (1999:63) only records ʕzīzi in Tangiers as a term used by the youngest to address their older brothers. Finally, the forms such as ʕzīzi, xtīti, nǝnna and ʕǝzzi are usually linked to women and children. However, in Qāʕ Asrās it can be noted that older men use them to address an elderly relative or neighbour:

(5) xtīti Rāḥma m-ǝl-ʕāʔila, rabba-ṯ-na mʕa yimma-na Xtīti Rāḥma from-the-family, raise\PFV-3FS-OBJ.1P with mother-1P ‘xtīti Rāḥma is part of the family, she raised us alongside our mother’ (man over 60 years old, TI3)

These would therefore be hypocoristic forms, the use of which is maintained throughout adulthood.

4.1.4 ‘‘Father’s mother’ or ‘‘mother’s mother’ ʕzīza ʕzīza is the most widespread term in north-western Morocco to refer to the father’s mother and to the mother’s mother. ʕzīza takes a synthetic genitive, e.g. ʕzīza-k ‘your father’s mother’, ʕzīza-na ‘our father’s mother’, and double marking possession too: ʕzīza-hum dǝ-wlād-i ‘father’s mother of my children’. yǝmma is the other term used in a rural and urban context. It is mostly used as a term of address and especially to refer to the father’s mother; in this case close contact with her seems pertinent. Another term attested in Tetouan is ḥanna, though the fact that the father’s mother originates in the Rif seems to explain this, as older people use it:

(6) ḥanna kān-ǝt rīfiyya, bḥaq trabba-t f-Mʁūʁa, Grandmother be\PFV-3SF Riffian, but be raised\PFV-3SF in-Mʁūʁa, kān-u bǝzzāf dǝ-rwāfa tǝmmak be\PFV-3P many of-Riffians there ‘ḥanna was from the Rif but was raised in Mʁūʁa [a quarter in the outskirts of Tangiers], many people from the Rif lived there’ (67 year-old man, T3)

ARABIC KINSHIP TERMS IN RURAL / URBAN MOROCCO 199

Another obsolete term in Tetouan is ṃa ʕāyni, or its hypocoristic forms ṃa ʕāynu ~ ṃaṃṃa ʕāynu, ‘mother of my eye’, used to refer to the father’s or mother’s mother or to an old woman from the family. In Heath (2002:81) and Herrero Muñoz-Cobo (2008:98) this term solely refers to the grandmother.

4.1.5 ‘‘Father’s father’ or ‘‘mother’s father’ ž ǝddi In all locations, the most widespread term for grandfather is žǝddi or its hypocoristic form žǝddu, and through elicitation the following plurals ždād ~ ždūd were recorded. žǝdd takes a synthetic construction: žǝdd-u ‘her father’s father’, žǝdd-na ‘our mother’s father’; as well as double marking possession: žǝdd-kum dyāl-kum ‘your father’s father’. Many of the hypocoristic forms of kinship terms end in -u. The origin of this hypocoristic suffix is not quite clear, and it is characteristic of other varieties as well (cf. Corriente, 1969:7 n. 13; Prunet and Idrissi, 2014:183–185). It must be pointed out that in the case of the dialects of north-western Morocco, it is a typical urban trait that is increasingly present in some rural areas. The only remarkable exception is the use of ḥnīni in Bab Berred, though children already tend to use žǝdd-u. When asking if this name is the most common in the zone, the informant (BB1) replies:

(7) ḥna ḥnīni, ǝl-ʕyāl a-y-lǝqṭ-u žǝddu We ḥnīni, the-children PV-3-peck\IPFV-PL grandfather ‘Here it is ḥnīni, the children peck at žǝddu’

Other compound varieties such as ḅa sīdi ~ ḅa ḥlu were recorded in Tetouan. Heath (2002:79) states that both terms, the latter with a gemination of l, refer to the grandfather, but in case of my study informants made clear that these terms refer to an elderly man, in the present case to a neighbour.

4.1.6 ‘‘Father’s brother, father’s sister’ m. ʕammi f. ʕammti, ʕma"ma pl. ʕma"mi, ʕamma"t pl. f. ʕammta"ti, ʕma"ma"ti Heath (2002:402) claimed that terms referring to father’s brother and father’s sister show in ‘the northern and Jebli M[uslim] dialects a jumble of forms’. In the case of the north-west, some forms seem to continue to coexist, though the use of ʕammi for the father’s brother and its hypocoristic form ʕammu is expanding as a term of address and reference. It is also the most widely used fictive kinship term not only in Morocco but also in many Arabic-speaking zones in North Africa and the Middle East, both for persons with family or affection ties or to address unknown elderly people (cf. Braun 1988; Parkinson, 2009:469).

200 SOCIOLINGUISTIC STUDIES

In Bni Sǝlmān the term ʕǝzzi is used to address the father’s brother (see section 4.1.3). Through elicitation, I found one fictive inversion use of ʕmūm in Qāʕ Asrās:

(8) nǝqdar nqūl n-ṣāḥbi: āǧi a-l-ʕmūm! 1-can\IPFV-SG 1-tell\IPFV-SG to-friend-1SG imp-SG VOC-l-ʕmūm ‘I can say it to my friend: Come here !’ (54 year-old man, TI3)

I also recorded the plural ʕmāmi in each of the locations and also a female plural ʕammāt in Qāʕ Asrās. In Heath (2002:403), this plural is attested in Tetouan where he highlights this gender fusion in the plural ʕamm. Finally, through elicitation, I recorded the plural ʕmūmiyya in Anjra and Tetouan. The most common form for the father’s sister in each of the locations is ʕammti, with the plural ʕammtāti, save in Ghomara where the forms ʕmāma and ʕmāmāti were also recorded. The different terms referring to the father’s sister are used as a term of reference and address, but they are rarely used as fictive kinship terms to convey respect or affection. I also compiled the diminutive hypocoristic form ʕammītu in Bni Xālǝd and ʕammtītu in Tetouan with the reduplication of the feminine morpheme -t. For the father’s brother’s wife two forms are attested and they are only used as terms of reference: one analytic construction with d mra d-ʕammi, and a construct state mrat ʕammi. Only for the father’s sister’s husband is this analytic construc- tion used: rāžǝl d-ʕammti. As terms of address, xālti ‘my mother’s sister’ and ʕammi ‘my father’s brother’, are more common as fictive kinship terms to convey closeness or respect. As we have already seen, the affection names nǝnna and ʕǝzzi are used in Bni Selmane. rāžǝl d-ʕammti is not used as a term of address for the father’s sister’s husband. The most common term is ʕammi or another affection term such as ʕzīzi (attested as well in Qāʕ Asrās).

4.1.7 ‘‘Mother’s brother, mother’s sister’ m. h9bībi, xa"li f. xa"lti pl. m. h9bība"ti, xwa"la"ti pl. f. xa"lta"ti The most common term in the north-west for mother’s brother is ḥbībi and its hypocoristic form ḥbību; only one masculine plural with gender merging ḥbībāti was recorded in all locations (Heath, 2002:422). In Bab Berred and Bni Selmane the most widespread is xāli pl. xwālāti, existing in other Jebli dialects from the southeast, e.g. Branes (Taza province) (Colin, 1921:117), Taounate and (Heath, 2002:81).

ARABIC KINSHIP TERMS IN RURAL / URBAN MOROCCO 201

The most widespread form for the mother’s sister is xālti, with the hypocoristic form xāltu in Tetouan, though its use is spreading to rural zones, as well as the hypocoristic diminutive xāltītu with the reduplication of the feminine morpheme. This is a term of address and reference and it is the most commonly used fictive kinship term to address old women, conveying respect or affection. Both mother’s father and father’s father (see section 4.1.5), and father’s brother and sister (see section 4.1.6) take synthetic and double marking constructions: ʕamm-a ‘her father’s brother’, ʕammt-ǝk ‘your father’s sister’, ʕmāmā-h ‘his father’s sister’, ʕamm-a d-ǝl-ʕṛūṣa ‘her father’s brother (of the bride)’, xālt-kum ‘your mother’s sister’, hbibā-hum ‘their mother’s brother’, etc. For the wife of the mother’s brother the analytic forms mrat ḥbībi / xāli ~ mra d-ḥbībi / xāli are used. For the husband of the maternal aunt the term of reference r-rāžǝl d-xālti is used, though the most common term of address is ʕammi, as a fictive kinship term, in all of the locations.

4.1.8 The husband’s family to the wife While kinship terms of address and reference usually coincide regarding close family, this is not the case for in-laws, as in those cases terms closer to fictive kinship are habitually used. l-ʕgūza, in ʕaǧūz, with dissimilation in contact with z (see Heath, 2002:136–138 for the realisation and distribution of ǧ in Moroccan Arabic), literally ‘old woman’, exists in each of the locations for ‘the husband’s mother’, save for Bab Berred where the form without the feminine morpheme is used, l-ʕgūz,11 while in Tetouan as well as in Rabat the same term refers to the husband’s father (De Prémare, Canamas, Comerro, Dallaporta and Ealet, 1996:IX/31). A plural ʕgāyǝz is used but it usually refers to old women, as well as the diminutive ʕgīza ‘the husband’s mother’. Another term recorded in Tetouan and Bni Ḥlu is lalla ‘lady’, which can be a term of reference and address (cf. Sadiqi, 2003:68–71). The most widely used terms of address in all locations are mrat ʕammi, xālti or, in some cases, yǝmma. As for the husband’s father š-šīx is the most common term both in rural and urban regions, though l-ʕgūz is also used in Tetouan. Both of them are reference terms. The most commonly used term of address is ʕammi, save for Bab Berred, where xāli is used. Finally, through elicitation, ḅa + proper name was recorded amongst old people in Tetouan, as well as sīdi, also in Anjra. Husband’s parents usually take an analytic construction: l-ʕgūz dyāl-a ‘her husband’s mother’ and l- ʕgūza d-Fāṭma ‘Faṭma’s husband’s mother’; š-šīx dyāl-a ‘her husband’s father’, š-šīx d-ǝǧ-ǧāṛa ‘neighbour’s husband’s father’.

202 SOCIOLINGUISTIC STUDIES

For the husband’s siblings, in Tetouan and Anjra the terms used are lūs pl. lwāyǝs and feminine lūsa, pl. lwāyǝs ~ lwāsāţ12 dim. lwīsāt, a kinship of Berber origin. As a result of greater Berber influence in Ghomara, the following forms exist: alūs pl. (i)lūsān13 ~ lwāyǝs fem. lūsa pl. lwāyǝs. Along the coast and inland the masculine singular is formed with the Berber masculine prefix a-. There is also a plural masculine Berber form ilūsān, used particularly inland. The feminine, however, does not usually preserve the Berber morphology and a plural masculine is used for both genders. In my corpus, the analytic construction is the most widespread and the synthetic construction is used only in the first singular, e.g. ālūs (dyāli) or lūs-i ‘my husband’s brother’, l-lūs dyāl-a ‘her husband’s brother’, lūst-i ‘my husband’s sister’, l-lusa dyāla ‘her husband’s sister’, etc. These terms are only used as terms of reference, as age and relationship play a major role when choosing a term of address. Amongst people of the same age, the most common form is to use the proper name; in case of different ages, fictive kinship terms ʕammi and xālti are used. It must be noted that these uses of terms of reference are not very common amongst people who already know each other, especially in rural zones, where the name is usually preferred or some analytical form to make clear who is being alluded to. This does not mean that these terms are in decline; they are simply avoided whenever the speaker does not wish to clarify or emphasize the kinship relationship. Finally, the term nūṭa pl. nwāyǝṭ, probably from Berber {nḍḍ} (Blažek, 2002:127) exists for a woman to refer to her husband’s brother’s wife: hūma nwāyǝṭ ‘they are married to two brothers’, n-nūṭa dyāl-a ‘her husband’s brother’s wife’. This is a term of reference and, as in the previous case, to address the person directly either the courtesy form xālti or nothing is used.

4.1.9 The wife’s family to the husband In rural areas, except in the case of preferential marriage and amongst people from the same village, relations between the husband and his wife’s family do not take place on a daily basis. One single term is recorded to refer collectively both to the wife’s siblings and parents: generally n-nsīb and n-nsība14 (pl. nsāyǝb), literally ‘relatives’, used in each of the locations save for Bni Selmane and Bab Berred, where l-xaṯna and l-xtǝn, pl. lǝxṯān15 are also used: probably an archaic form maintained inland in Ghomara. De Prémare, Canamas, Comerro, Dallaporta and Ealet (1994:IV/23) found these uses also in Fez and Tetouan, though the term is unknown amongst my oldest informants.

ARABIC KINSHIP TERMS IN RURAL / URBAN MOROCCO 203

Through elicitation, I compiled the terms slīf and slīfa for the wife’s siblings and I was told that they would only be used as terms of reference. In this case, at least in Tetouan, given that in rural zones I did not witness interaction between the wife’s relatives and the husband, the terms of address usually follow the same pattern: if the wife’s parents are elderly, a fictive kinship term is used, mostly xālti and ʕammi, but no special treatment is used for her siblings.

5 Conclusions

The present study of kinship terms reveals that variation occurs between rural areas and the city, as well as between young and older people. Kinship terms in Tetouan and the neighbouring rural zones reveal significant dialect variation undoubtedly fostered by population movements but mostly in a cultural and linguistic continuum. The city vs. countryside variation is especially noticeable in inland regions of Ghomara, where dialect levelling is not yet as perceptible as in other rural regions where many terms are practically ignored by younger generations. Therefore, it can be argued that the processes of levelling and linguistic change taking place in north-west Morocco affect kinship terms, extending to the forms of the prestigious variant, that is, the Tetouan-Tangiers one: thus, there is a tendency to use ʕammti ‘father’s sister’ instead of ʕmāma, ḅḅa ‘father’ instead of bāba, and žǝddi ‘father’s father’ instead of ḥnīni in rural areas. Affective terms such as ʕǝzzi, nǝnna, ʕzīzi, xtīti to refer to older siblings or other close relatives are simulta- neously disappearing in rural regions, as well as affective terms such as ṃṃa ʕayni or ḅa sīdi to refer elderly people in the city. The loss of some variants and the shift toward the prestigious ones are especially noticeable amongst the younger generation where many variables, such as age and education, are involved. Kinship terms are largely used in address inversion or bipolarity ‒ an uncle addresses his nephew or niece by using ʕammu dyāli ‘my uncle’ (see n. 6) ‒ as well as in fictive inversion ‒ when kinship terms such as xāy ‘my brother’ or xti ‘my sister’ serve to address friends, non-kin and even strangers ‒ which have been defined and described based on the address theory (cf. Braun, 1988). These uses, which have been attested in other Arabic-speaking varieties such as Lebanese, Egyptian or Kuwaiti Arabic, among others (Ayoub, 1964; Yassin, 1975; Parkinson, 1985; Braun, 1988), are also found in these Maghrebi varieties. In conclusion, kinship terms in north-western Morocco, their hypocoristic forms and other affection terms are used differently depending on family contexts. Kinship terms are being affected by levelling and linguistic change in processes due to socio-economic changes that are having an impact on family structures as a

204 SOCIOLINGUISTIC STUDIES result of rural exodus, the preference of , etc. Thus, many of the uses linked to tensions and affections resulting from are disappearing as well as local variants. Furthermore, it can be established that despite the variation showed in kinship term forms, those that remain are stable in their semantic basis.

Notes

1. In this article I use the term Berber (also known as Amazigh) following its use in the consulted literature on Berber linguistics. 2. Jbala (literal meaning ‘inhabitants of the mountain’) is an ethnonym and also a place name, and refers to the mountainous region of north-western Morocco. Ghomara is another ethnonym and a place name referring to a small area north of Chefchaouen. 3. Ceuta is a Spanish city, the sociolinguistic situation of which is characterized by bilingual Spanish-Ceuta Arabic. The Ceuta Arabic variety is part of the Moroccan Arabic of north-western Morocco due to the origin of the Muslim community of Ceuta and other historical and social factors. For an overview of the sociolinguistic situation of Ceuta see Vicente (2007) and Rivera Reyes (2012), amongst others. 4. For an overall view of the different theories arising from the middle of the 20th century regarding kinship in the Maghreb see Aixelà (2000:59–85). 5. I wish to thank Ángeles Vicente and Araceli González Vázquez for their helpful comments in the first version of this article. Part of this corpus was compiled with both of them during a 20-day stay in the area analysed in this paper within the framework of the project Fronteras lingüísticas y factores sociales: perspectivas sincrónicas y diacrónicas de la región del Magreb (FFI2011- 26782-C02-01), funded by the Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad. 6. Bi-polarity or address inversion takes place when a kinship term is used as a term of address to define two different relations: generally when a father or uncle addresses a child using ‘father’ or ‘uncle’. Address inversion and fictive inver- sion are attested in north-western Morocco: quite often, there is a higher use of hypocoristic forms emphasized with dyāl: ḅḅa dyāli ‘my dad’, xāltu dyāli ‘my auntie’, ʕammu dyāli ‘my uncle’, etc. (for other Arabic varieties cf. Braun, 1988: 266–270). 7. For research on kinship terms in Berber cf. Galand, 1978 and Blažek, 2002, amongst others. 8. For an overview of analytic genitive structures in Arabic dialects cf. Harning (1980); for Moroccan Arabic cf. Heath (2002:460–462) and Boumans (2006), amongst others. 9. Until now, kinship terms ending in -yn, probably derived from Berber possessive preposition n (Heath, 2002:411) are not attested, even in Ghomara where kinship terms in Ghomara Berber use this possessive preposition save for brothers and sisters (Mourigh, 2016:121). However, forms as bābāyǝn and yemmāyǝn are still used in some southern Jebli dialects (e.g. El Ghazaz, 2017:208, 211).

ARABIC KINSHIP TERMS IN RURAL / URBAN MOROCCO 205

10. A quite similar instance can be found in Amazigh dadda and its variants, referring to the grandfather, older brother and paternal uncle (Naït-Zarrad, 1999:II/274–275). In sum, it is a respectful term which may even refer to black slaves (de Prémare, Canamas, Comerro, Dallaporta and Ealet, 1994: V/208). 11. A form ʕaggūz was attested in Ouargha (Lévi-provençal, 1921:236), with gemination of the second root consonant. 12. The plural masculine is mostly used for both genders; I only recorded l-wāsāt through elicitation. 13. Colin (1999:64) recorded in Tangiers only one plural, lūsān. 14. Colin (1999) did not record a feminine form for the wife’s sister in Tangiers. 15. Cf. Cuisenier and Miquel (1965:38–40) where different proposals are put forward to explain the rather unclear terms in Arabic to refer to this relationship.

About the author

Amina Naciri-Azzouz is a PhD candidate at the University of Zaragoza (Spain). She received her Bachelor’s degree in Arabic Philology (2006–2011) from the Complutense University (Madrid, Spain). She is currently working on the description of the Ghomara Arabic varieties (north-western Morocco) in a context of linguistic change in progress.

References

Aguadé, J. (2003) Estudio descriptivo y comparativo de los fonemas del árabe dialectal marroquí. Estudios de dialectología norteafricana y andalusí 7: 59–109. Aixelà, Y. (2000) Mujeres en Marruecos: Un análisis desde el parentesco y el género. Barcelona: Edicions Bellaterra. Al-Wer, E. (2009) Variation. In K. Versteegh, M. Eid, A. Elgibali, M. Woidich and A. Zaborski (eds) Encyclopaedia of Arabic Language and Linguistics IV 627–639. Leiden and Boston: Brill. Ayoub, M. R. (1964) Bi-polarity in Arabic kinship terms. In H. G. Lunt (ed.) Proceedings of the Ninth International Congress of Linguists, Cambridge, Mass., August 27-31, 1962 1100–1106. The Hague: Mouton. Behnstedt, P. and Benabbou, M. (2002) Zu den arabischen Dialekten der Gegend von Tāza (Nordmarokko). In W. Arnold and H. Bobzin (eds)“Sprich doch mit deinen Knechten aramäisch, wir verstehen es!”. 60 Beiträge zur Semitistik: Festschrift für Otto Jastrow zum 60. Geburtstag zum 60 Geburstag 53–72. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. Blažek, V. (2002) Towards the Berber in the Afroasiatic context. In K. Naït-Zerrad (ed.) Articles de Linguistique Berbère: Mémorial Werner Vycichl 103–135. Paris: L’Harmattan. Boumans, L. (2006) The attributive possessive in Moroccan Arabic spoken by young bilinguals in the Netherlands and their peers in Morocco. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 9: 213–231. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728906002598.

206 SOCIOLINGUISTIC STUDIES

Braun, F. (1988) Terms of Address: Problems of Patterns and Usage in Various Languages and Cultures. New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Doi : https://doi.org/ 10.1515/9783110848113. Caubet, D. (1993) L’arabe marocain. 2 vols. Paris-Louvain: Peeters. Caubet, D. and Iraqui-Sinaceur, Z. (eds) (1999) Arabe marocain: Inédits de Georges S. Colin. Saint-Rémy-de-Provence: Édisud. Colin, G. S. (1921) Le parler arabe du nord de la région de Taza. Bulletin de l’Institut Français D’Archéologie Orientale XVIII: 33–119. Corriente, F. (1969) qalqūl en semítico: Forma hipocorística y del lenguaje infantil, documentada con ejemplos de interés para la lingüística semítica y general. Sefarad 29: 3–11. Cuisenier, J. and Miquel, A. (1965) La terminologie arabe de la parenté: Analyse sémantique et analyse componentielle. L’Homme 5(3): 17–59. Doi: https://doi.org/ 10.3406/hom.1965.366740. Dallet, J. M. (1982) Dictionnaire kabyle-français. Paris: Société d’études linguistiques et anthropologiques de France. Davies, R. P. (1949) Syrian Arabic kinship terms. Southwestern Journal of 5 (3): 244–252. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1086/soutjanth.5.3.3628504. de Prémare, A.-L., Canamas, J.-P., Comerro, V., Dallaporta, C. and Ealet, E. (1993–1999) Dictionnaire arabe-français: établi sur la base de fichiers, ouvrages, enquêtes, manuscrits études et documents divers. Paris: L’Harmattan. Eckert, P. (1996) Age as a sociolinguistic variable. In F. Coulmas (ed.) The Handbook of Sociolinguistic 151–167. Oxford: Blackwell. El Ghazaz, F. (2017) Le parler žəbli d’Aïn Mediouna (Province de Taounate). In Á. Vicente, D. Caubet and A. Naciri Azzouz (eds) La région du Nord-Ouest marocain: Parlers et pratiques sociales et culturelles 201–218. Zaragoza: Prensas de la Universidad de Zaragoza. Farghal, M. and Shakir, A. (1994) Kin terms and titles of address as relational social honorifics in . Anthropological Linguistics 36(2): 240–253. Galand, L. (1978) Réflexions d’un grammairien sur le vocabulaire Berbère de la parenté. Littérature Orale Arabo-Berbère 9: 119–124. Geertz, H. (1979) Moroccan kinship terms of reference. In C. Geertz, H. Geertz and L. Rosen, Meaning and Order in Moroccan Society: Three Essays in Cultural Analysis 380–385. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. González Vázquez, A. (2010) Mujeres de Yebala: Género, Islam y alteridades en Marruecos. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Universidad de Cantabria. Guerrero Parrado, J. (2015). El dialecto árabe hablado en la ciudad marroquí de . Zaragoza: Prensas de la Universidad de Zaragoza. Harning, K. E. (1980) The Analytic Genitive in the Modern Arabic Dialects. Göteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis. Hart, D. M. (1976) The Aith Waryaghar of the Moroccan Rif: An and History. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.

ARABIC KINSHIP TERMS IN RURAL / URBAN MOROCCO 207

Heath, J. (2002) Jewish and Muslim Dialects of Moroccan Arabic. London: Routledge Curzon. Herrero Muñoz-Cobo, B. (2008) Las formas de tratamiento en árabe marroquí: Lengua e identidad. Estudios de dialectología norteafricana y andalusí 12: 93–103. Lévi-Provençal, É. (1922) Textes arabes de l’Ouargha: Dialecte des Jbala (Maroc septentrional). Paris: Édition Ernest Leroux. Lévy, S. (1998) Problématique historique du processus d’arabisation au Maroc: Pour une histoire linguistique du Maroc. In J. Aguadé, P. Cressier and Á. Vicente (eds) Peuplement et arabisation au Maghreb Occidental: Dialectologie et histoire 11–26. Madrid y Zaragoza: Casa de Velázquez y Universidad de Zaragoza. Mateo Dieste, J. L. (2013) Estrategias matrimoniales y parentesco entre las clases populares del norte de Marruecos y la emigración a Cataluña. Revista Internacional de Sociología 71(2): 415–439. Doi: https://doi.org/10.3989/ris.2012.03.2013. Miller, C. (2007) Arabic urban : Development and Changes. In C. Miller, E. Al-Wer, D. Caubet and J. C. E. Watson (eds) Arabic in the City: Issues in Dialect Contact and Language Variation 1–30. London and New York: Routledge. Montagne, R. (1930) Les Berbères et le Makhzen dans le sud du Maroc: Essai sur la transformation politique des Berbères sédentaires (groupe chleuh). Paris: F. Alcan. Moscoso, F. (2003) El dialecto árabe de Chauen (N. de Marruecos). Cádiz: Universidad de Cádiz. Mourigh, Kh. (2016) A Grammar of Ghomara Berber (North-West Morocco). Köln: Rüdiger Köppe Verlag. Naciri-Azzouz, A. (2016) Les variétés arabes de Ghomara? s-sāħǝl vs. ǧ-ǧbǝl (la côte vs. la montagne). In G. Grigore and G. Bițună (eds) The Arabic Varieties: Far and Wide. Proceedings of the 11th international conference of AIDA, Bucharest, 2015 405–412. Bucarest: Editura Universității din București. Naït-Zerrad, K. (1998–2002) Dictionnaire des racines berbères (formes attestées). 3 vols. Paris and Louvain: Peeters. Parkinson, D. B. (1985) Constructing the Social Context of Communication: Terms of Address in Egyptian Arabic. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110857351. Parkinson, D. B. (2009) Terms of address. In K. Versteegh, M. Eid, A. Elgibali, M. Woidich and A. Zaborski (eds) Encyclopaedia of Arabic Language and Linguistics IV 466–471. Leiden and Boston: Brill. Piamenta, M. (1989) A lexicographic study of kinship terms in Yemeni Dialects. Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 12: 166–185. Potter, T. M. (1995) Moroccan terms of address in the film ‘Dmu‘ al-Nadem’ (Tears of Regret). Georgetown Journal of Languages and Linguistics 3(2–4): 218–226. Prunet, J.-F. and Idrissi, A. (2014) Overlapping morphologies in Arabic hypocoristics. In S. Bendjaballah, N. Faust, M. Lahrouchi and N. Lampitelli (eds) The Form of Structure, the Structure of Form: Essays in Honor of Jean Lowenstamm 177–192. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamin. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1075/lfab. 12.14pru.

208 SOCIOLINGUISTIC STUDIES

Rivera Reyes, V. (2012) El contacto de lenguas en Ceuta. Ceuta: Instituto de Estudios Ceutíes. Robertson-Smith, W. (1885) Kinship and Marriage in Early Arabia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Sadiqi, F. (2003) Women, Gender and Language in Morocco. Leiden and Boston: Brill. Sánchez, P. and Vicente, Á. (2012) Variación dialectal en árabe marroquí: ǝl-haḍra š- šāmālīya u la-hḍṛa l-marrākšīya. In A. Barontini, C. Pereira, Á. Vicente and K. Ziamari (eds) Dynamiques langagières en Arabophonies: Variations, contacts, migrations et créations artistiques. Hommage offert à Dominique Caubet par ses élèves et collègues 223–252. Zaragoza: Universidad de Zaragoza. Vicente, Á. (2000) El dialecto árabe de Anjra (norte de Marruecos): Estudio lingüístico y textos. Zaragoza: Universidad de Zaragoza. Vicente, Á. (2002) Une interprétation sociolinguistique d’un dialecte de Jbala: Les parlers féminin et masculin dans le dialecte d’Anjra. In A. Youssi, F. Benjelloun, M. Dahbi and Z. Iraqui-Sinaceur (eds) Aspects of the Dialects of Arabic Today: Proceedings of the 4th Conference of AIDA, In Honour of Professor David Cohen 336–344. Rabat: AMAPATRIL. Vicente, Á. (2007) Ceuta: Una ciudad entre dos lenguas. Formación y evolución del árabe ceutí. Ceuta: Instituto de Estudios Ceutíos. Vicente, Á. (2009) La evolución del árabe marroquí en la ciudad de Tetuán. In L. Abu- Shams (ed.) Actas del III Congreso Internacional de árabe marroquí: Estudio, enseñanza y aprendizaje 183–202. Vitoria, Universidad del País Vasco. Vignez-Zunz, J. (1995) Djebala. Encyclopédie berbère XVI. Retrieved on 14 September 2017 from: http://encyclopedieberbere.revues.org/2176 Yassin, M. A. M. F. (1975) A Linguistic Study of Forms of Address in Kuwaiti Colloquial Arabic. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Leeds.

(Received April 2016; revision received 19th September 2017; accepted October 2017; final revision received 24th January 2018)