A sociolinguistic investigation of language shift among Libyan Tuareg: The case of Ghat and Barkat Salah Adam A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) in linguistics Department of Language and Linguistics University of Essex AUGUST 2017 ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my supervisor Prof. Peter Patrick for his invaluable advice, guidance, insightful comments and unlimited support from the first day I decided to work with him. Peter has been a great friend and supported me, not only academically but also throughout the difficult times and during moments of frustration and stress. My sincere thanks, respect and appreciations also go to Prof. Enam Al-Wer for her valuable support and informative comments. Her generous comments and feedback on my work in the Arabic Research Group have been extremely helpful and intellectually stimulating. I also would like to thank my supervisory board; Dr. Vineeta Chand and Uri Horesh for their support. I am also grateful to Prof. Phil Scholfield for his statistical advice, useful suggestions, and being patient to answer my statistical endless questions. I must thank my parents, wife and children for their prayers, hearty support, encouragements and being patient throughout the time of my research. I would also like to express my especial thanks to all Libyan Tuareg people, namely, Barkat and Ghatian people who participated in this study and have been very kind to me and treated me as a member of the community. I am especially thankful to my friend, Mohammed, for his hospitality and generosity and the time he spent with me during my fieldwork. Finally, I would like to express my special thanks to all members of the Arabic Research Group for their valuable feedback on my work and help during my Ph.D journey. iii ABSTRACT This study explores a shift situation among Libyan Tuareg in the southwestern region of Libya. They are shifting from Targia (Tamaheq), an indigenous minority language, to Arabic, the predominant language in the country. The two communities under investigation are Ghat, ethnically and linguistically heterogeneous and Barkat, ethnically and linguistically homogeneous. The investigation focuses on Targia’s use and transmission across generations as well as domains of language use. A combination of quantitative and ethnographic methods was employed to collect data from 221 participants (114 from Brakat and 107 from Ghat), including 44 semi-structured interviews (23 in Ghat and 21 in Barkat). The linguistic vitality of Targia is analysed through a synergistic application of theoretical approaches such as Sasse’s Gaelic-Arvanitika-Model (1992) and Batibo’s “process based-perspective” (2005). Analysis reveals that the use of Targia has declined across age groups and in most domains of language use though Targia still has a symbolic value. External factors – political, cultural and socioeconomic – proved to be influential determinants in the process of shifting towards Arabic. These external forces resulted in the construction of negative attitudes and ideologies towards Targia (“lexical impoverishment, incorrect, not a codified language”, etc.), particularly when assessed against Arabic, the allegedly superior language. Such beliefs, in turn, affected language practices of the Tuareg and led to disruption in intergenerational transmission. The quantitative analysis shows that among the social variables considered in this study, age is the most marked and influential variable on language use, followed by community and the interactive effect of those two. In spite of Tuareg claiming positive attitudes to Targia, including its promotion, development, and teaching it to their children, the study suggests that these positive attitudes and the use of Targia have become progressively disconnected over the generations. The qualitative analysis reveals that the influence of Arabic is not only iv confined to the functional level but also expanded to the symbolic one in a way that has promoted the Tuaregs’ Libyan nationalism. The qualitative analysis indicates that Tuareg identity is multiple and hierarchical in the sense that Libyan nationalism is situated at the top, followed by the tribal and regional associations. Religion is also proved to be an effectual social factor in Tuareg linguistic behaviour and identity, either through Tuareg’s perception of and attachment to Arabic as a divine language, or through the political exploitation of religion by the state to impose its Arabic-only policy and the Arab identity. Key words: Libyan Tuareg; Targia; language shift; transmission; language policy; Libyan Arabic; Modern Standard Arabic; identity; language attitudes; language ideologies. v TABLE OF CONTENT ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................... II ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................................... III LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................. X LIST OF FIGURES ......................................................................................................... XI 1 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................... 1 1.1 THE SCOPE OF THE STUDY ................................................................................................... 2 1.1.1 Aims of the study .................................................................................................. 2 1.1.2 Filling the gaps and the significance of the study ................................................. 4 1.2 THE PROCESS OF LANGUAGE MAINTENANCE AND LANGUAGE SHIFT ................................. 8 1.3 LANGUAGE MAINTENANCE AND SHIFT IN THE GREATER ARAB MAGHREB .................... 14 1.4 A BRIEF REVIEW OF SOME THEORETICAL MODELS .......................................................... 21 1.5 BRIEF REVIEW OF THE RQ ................................................................................................ 31 1.6 THE ORGANIZATION OF THE CHAPTERS ........................................................................... 31 33 CHAPTER 2: SOCIO-HISTORICAL AND LINGUISTIC BACKGROUNDS ......... 33 2.1 LOCATION AND POPULATION OF LIBYA ............................................................................ 34 2.2 ETHNIC COMPOSITION OF LIBYA ...................................................................................... 35 2.2.1 Arabs ................................................................................................................... 35 2.2.2 Libyan Amazigh (Tamazight speakers) .............................................................. 35 2.2.3 Libyan Tuareg ..................................................................................................... 37 2.2.4 Maghaweers (maɣa:wi:r) or returnees ................................................................ 38 2.2.5 Ishumar ............................................................................................................... 39 2.2.6 Tuareg in neighbouring countries ....................................................................... 40 2.2.7 Tibu, a.k.a. Tebou (Teda) ................................................................................... 40 2.3 THE LOCALITY OF THE RESEARCH .................................................................................... 41 2.3.1 Ghat ..................................................................................................................... 41 2.3.2 Barkat .................................................................................................................. 43 2.4 LINGUISTIC PROFILE OF LIBYA ......................................................................................... 47 2.4.1 Diglossia and bilingualism ................................................................................. 47 2.4.2 Arabic.................................................................................................................. 54 2.4.2.1 Classical and/ or Modern Standard Arabic (CA, MSA) .............................. 54 2.4.2.2 Colloquial Libyan Arabic (LA) .................................................................... 54 2.4.2.3 Libyan Arabic as a lingua franca ................................................................. 56 2.4.3 Amazigh (Berber) language ................................................................................ 57 vi 2.4.4 The Tuareg language .......................................................................................... 59 2.4.5 Literacy acquisition status .................................................................................. 61 2.4.6 Mutuality of understanding Berber and Tuareg dialects .................................... 64 2.4.7 The influence of Arabic on the Berber and Tuareg languages ........................... 68 2.5 THE IMPACT OF EXTERNAL FACTORS ON LANGUAGE SHIFT ............................................ 72 2.5.1 Governmental language policy towards non-Arab ethnic minorities ................. 73 2.5.1.1 Language policy before and after 1951 ....................................................... 74 2.5.1.2 Language schools after 1969 ....................................................................... 77 2.5.1.2.1 The Arabization movement ................................................................... 80 2.5.1.3 Language policy