Talk:Egyptian Arabic/Archive 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Objections[edit]

(1) National Language: in what way is the Egyptian dialect a national language? How do we know it's regarded as such? Source?

i am Egyptian and ask ANYONE in Egypt and he will answer you that Egyptian Arabic is just a dialect. But copts insist that it is a language so that they get Egypt out from its natural Arab environment and culture there are some insisting on this thing in wikipedia and i can see it in every article realted to Egypt. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.234.7.53 (talk) 01:32, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(2) Saying that some people advocate "doing away with Arabic altogether" in favor of the Egyptian dialect is essentially taking the position that the Egyptian dialect is a seperate language from Arabic, which is a POV position. That's why the word "Arabic" in that sentence should be replaced with "Standard Arabic" since there is no question that that is what they were attempting to "do away with".

(3) Lingua Franca: the closest thing the Arab world has to a lingua franca is Standard Arabic. The Egyptian dialect may be the most widely understood, but that doesn't make it a lingua franca. Does the author seriously think a Saudi would speak to a Syrian in an Egyptian accent for example?

(4) Coptic Substratum: the claim that constructions such as "الراجل دا" are peculiar to the Egyptian dialect is false. This is a commonly used construction among the bedouins and the people of Najd; in fact it is the dominant one. I'm sure better examples can be found of the "Coptic substratum". I don't deny that there are Coptic influences, but it seems like someone is trying to overstate the case a little bit.

As for making edits without using the talk page first, well I was just following WP's "be bold" guideline, which serves to stimulate new discussions such as this one. I'm glad my edits attracted your attention, and I hope we can do some good work together.

Regards. -- Slacker 00:02, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1. In the sense described in national language.
2. I have no problem with adding the word "Standard" to that sentence, but the question of whether Egyptian Arabic is a language or a dialect is hopelessly useless as any self-respecting professional linguist will tell you, since it is, like many of the world's major languages, equally a dialect and a language. The word variety is therefore frequently used, but Egyptian Arabic is indeed often described as a language in specialist literature (Haeri, for example). In any event, as I said, this has been discussed before, so I suggest reading the archives.
3. The answer to the question is yes. Arabic-speakers with more widely divergent varieties, like Moroccan for example, often resort to Egyptian in order to be understood, even when they are speaking with a non-Egyptian. I have observed this happening myself.
4. Then you shouldn't have trouble providing a citation for that claim as well.
WP also works through consensus building. The questions you are raising have been discussed extensively here before, and some are controversial and continue to be debated in Egypt today. It is best to utilize the talk page to reach consensus if you want any of your changes to stick. — Zerida 00:42, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
1. In the sense described in national language.
"A national language is a language (or language variant, i.e. dialect) which represents the national identity of a nation or country. A national language is used for political and legal discourse." It's not clear from this article how this applies to the Egyptian dialect, especially the latter clause, but this is a minor qualm.
2. I have no problem with adding the word "Standard" to that sentence, but the question of whether Egyptian Arabic is a language or a dialect is hopelessly useless as any self-respecting professional linguist will tell you, since it is, like many of the world's major languages, equally a dialect and a language. The word variety is therefore frequently used, but Egyptian Arabic is indeed often described as a language in specialist literature (Haeri, for example). In any event, as I said, this has been discussed before, so I suggest reading the archives.
I'm not interested in the question of whether or not it's a seperate language. I'm only interested in this article not taking sides on that question. That is why inserting the word "Standard" is necessary.
3. The answer to the question is yes. Arabic-speakers with more widely divergent varieties, like Moroccan for example, often resort to Egyptian in order to be understood, even when they are speaking with a non-Egyptian. I have observed this happening myself.
The example you gave does not make it a lingua-franca. It's far more common for people to approximate Standard Arabic (mainly by replacing more obscure vocabulary with more widely known words, and by slowing down their speech) in order to overcome the "dialect barrier". Maghrebis in particular resort to this more than others; perhaps it sounded like Egyptian to you, but that does not make it so. The very most that your example could show is that it's a lingua franca between Maghrebis and non-Maghrebis, but that's not the same as being a lingua franca across the Arab World. In any case, imitating another accent or dialect (even Egyptian) is usually seen as an attempt at parody and is considered rude. Judging by your user page, I'm surprised someone like you does not know this. Anyway, I understand you're facscination with the Egytpian dialect, but here you're talking about how non-Egyptians speak, and I'm sure most of us would be surprised to learn we speak to each other in an Egyptian accent!
4. Then you shouldn't have trouble providing a citation for that claim as well.
We'll see. I understand that I may not find a citation because the Peninsular dialects are under-studied, unfortunately, so it's likely that this false claim is here to stay. However, for your own personal information as a linguist, I could point you to some relevant audio if you don't believe what I say.
WP also works through consensus building. The questions you are raising have been discussed extensively here before, and some are controversial and continue to be debated in Egypt today. It is best to utilize the talk page to reach consensus if you want any of your changes to stick.
What exactly makes you think I'm not willing to use the talk page? I made one single set of edits, yet you're making it sound like I engaged in a full-blown, multiple-revert edit war. Please try to tone it down a bit. -- Slacker 01:20, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Tone what down? It was you who decided to make these changes, including deleting a portion of the article, when the article itself makes it quite clear that some of these issues are a source of controversy and have been under debate for over a century. There is even a separate section on the "language-dialect" question. While it is not a requirement, it is common courtesy on Wikipedia to check the Talk page and past discussions to see which of these issues has already been addressed, which is exactly what I asked you to do [1] before you made your second edit.
Furthermore, there is no use in continuing to debate items for which citations have already been provided. Your own personal take on code-switching between the different varieties of Arabic (what you call "accent" [sic]), without substantiation, does not account for much here, and it is especially of no consequence to me as it is in complete contradiction with my own experiences. As I said, if you want to add the word Standard to that sentence, that's up to you. — Zerida 02:33, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Coptic substratum[edit]

The article states:

Two syntactic features that are particular to Egyptian Arabic inherited from Coptic are:
• postposed demonstratives as discovered and described by the Egyptian linguist and researcher Bayoumi Andil in his book The current status of culture in Egypt: "this" and "that" are placed after the noun.

Regardless of having a source (sources can also be incomplete, biased or just simply unintentionally wrong) that is inaccurate:

  1. This feature is also correct and widely used in MSA. Al rajulu hatha الرجل هذا– Al bintu hathihi البنت هذه are both grammatically correct and used as much as the other way.
  2. This is also present in almost all other dialects of Arabic, examples: in Shami (all accents): al rajaal had (or hada)الرجال هادا (هاد) or al zalama had (hada)الزلمة هادا/هاد; Iraqi and gulf: al rajaal hatha الرجال هذا, al rayyaal hatha الريال هذا
• in-situ wh words (i.e. "who", "when", "why" remain in their "logical" positions in a sentence rather than being preposed, or moved to the front of the sentence, as in Standard Arabic and English).

(side note, proposed is written with an o not an e, didn’t want to change it lest I may be accused of edit-warring)

Same two notes above: MSA: Raha (or thahava) ila masin mata/limatha راح (ذهب) إلى مصر متى/لماذا;…etc. although not common and rarely used but grammatically correct. Shami: rah la masir imta/leish راح لمصر إيمتى/ليش commonly used, more than the other way. Iraqi: rah il masir shwakit/leish راح إلمصر شوكت/ليش used as commonly as the other way round. According to what I hear from the Egyptians I know and TV, the other way is sometimes used by them although rarely but does not sound "wrong".

It would be very difficult to argue that a minority of Copts living almost exclusively in Egypt have affected both MSA and almost all other dialects. There probably is some affect of the language but these examples seem not to be. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maha Odeh (talk • contribs) 06:48, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Coptic substratal influence is fairly well-document with respect to this feature -- Nishio (1996), for example, which is referenced in the article. I don't agree that the above is grammatically "correct" in CA/MSA, but it would be nice to see a reference. — Zerida 06:57, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
on the place of questions words in Egyptian, yes, this is distinctive, and often 'explained' by Coptic substratum. But for demonstrative position, even though it has been claimed, many other dialects (e.g. in the Maghreb) do the same, and can just as well be explained by natural shift or use of a minority pattern in Old Arabic. The 'particular' part should be removed here, and a bit more doubt put in! Drmaik 08:27, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't agree. Since Arabic grammar was based on the Quran, these are examples from the Quran to show that it is way older than any dialect:
{ إني أريد أن أنكحك إحدى ابنتي هاتين }27 القصص
فَذُوقُوا بِمَا نَسِيتُمْ لِقَاء يَوْمِكُمْ هَذَا – السجدة 14
similar but not exact examples:
{ فإذا جاءتهم الحسنة قالوا لنا هذه} (don't remember the aya)
{ها أنتم أولاء تحبونهم} 119 آل عمران .
Anyway, since I got this from the top of my head not from some Western linguist, I'm quite sure I can't do anything about it. I'm just hoping someone specialised will. --Maha Odeh 08:44, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm a little confused what you mean by 'I don't agree'. I was saying that the evidence for Coptic influence for demonstratives being post-nominal is weak, which is also the case you are making, and what the verses give examples of. Drmaik 08:53, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't reffering to you Drmaik, I was editing the same time you were reply to Zerida, but you saved before me so I just re-wrote what I was writing before. I cut out some because I thought the reply was too long so maybe I should have also removed the phrase "I don't agree" because apparentely it became unclear. --Maha Odeh 09:02, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The passages from the Qur'an are not examples of generalized postposed demonstratives. These examples can be found in any language including English; e.g. 'I prefer these 'or 'I like this one'. In Egyptian Arabic, demonstratives as a general rule are almost never fronted -- that's the standard, which is not the case in either CA or other dialects. When they are, it's usually to mark a sentence for emphasis, again like English. However, I am interested in finding out more about other North African dialects where this may be the standard. — Zerida 08:29, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I just removed this: ...as discovered and described by the Egyptian linguist and researcher Bayoumi Andil in his book "The current status of culture in Egypt". Don't know how that got in there, but it's not something that he "discovered". — Zerida 08:34, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I've jusy had a look at Bishai, Notes on the Coptic substratum in Egyptian Arabic. Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 80, No. 3, Jul. - Sep., 1960 225-9. He claims (after discounting some other theories) that the following constructions can be adduced to Coptic influence:

  1. imperative in ma 'ma tekteb' write!
  2. past 'a' particle 'a hu semʕ' he heard
  3. using demonstratives in copular constructions 'da (a)na l-malek' I am the king
  4. lack of wh- fronting 'roHt feen'

I'm sure there are other papers of other opinions, (also the first two are marked as variants, rather than the 'standard'). Drmaik 12:07, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mr/Dr Maik aka Zerida new friend that was created 4days ago!, Thats the dialect changes we have in English dialects used by African-Americans in the USA is far more varied. However, its still a dialect for example Afro Americans/city dwellers in the USA use the words

  • Aint instead of I am not
  • You is instead you are
  • (Dis n Dat) instead of (this and that).
  • gimmee instead give me

their dialect exists on TV and the streets, myspace. However, its not a language because no country recoginzes it as a language....same applies to the Egyptian "a'amiya" dialects.--Skatewalk 22:25, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly Skatewalk, People, there is no such language as Masri, since Egypt itself has several dialects, and same to other arab Countries, and are all understood to each others when writen down in regular arabic Letters...

example of several Egyptian Dialects Alexandria - Hanestanouk a'alla el Emma Cairo and Delta - Hastanak a;ala el nasya Upper Egypt - astanak a'aleh nasiyeh

same for other arab dialects

Arab League —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 19:11, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Characteristic words and sentences in Egyptian Arabic[edit]

What exactly is meant by this? I don't understand the point of listing those words. --Maha Odeh 06:55, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is this actually meant to be a serious question? Egyegy 12:09, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Language" vs. "dialect"[edit]

Seems to imply that it is a language that is called a dialect for political reasons. This should be re-written since I'm sure sure that many Egyptians would disagree making this a POV. --Maha Odeh 07:03, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In a way, it is a language considered a dialect for political reasons, but an argument can be the other way around if it were a standard language -- that it is a dialect considered a language for political reasons. Both of these statement are correct, since the line between both is often not objectively clear. However, I don't see how saying "Egyptian Arabic is considered to be one of the many lects which, despite possibly being languages on abstand grounds, are united in a single language by a common dachsprache (Modern Standard Arabic)" is POV in either direction. — Zerida 07:15, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Zerida here. The sentence covers the situation quite well, using linguistic criteria appropriately: it doesn't say 'it's really a language' or 'it's really a dialect', both of which would be inaccurate on one criterion or another. Drmaik 08:18, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ask any linguist, he will tell a Language is a dialect with an army. Danish and Swedish a re the same. However, they are recognized as languages, because Denmark has an army and constituition that doesn't want to identify with thier Northern nieghbors. Egypt is an Arab nation with an Arab constituition andarmy. Once you expell the 70 Million Arabs and Arab sympathizers, then you can change the constituition and create any language you want, as of now you are merely a small minority of refugees living in their fantasy land. (again I think its a beautiful thing and I admire imagination). However, this is the wrong place to let go of your wild imagination and passions.

The only language to split from Arabic is Maltese because they eliminated the muslims, Muslims will always enforce the Arabic language wherever they make the majority and last time I checked the Copts make a tiny minority in Egypt. (except in Lebanon where the Christian Arabs make up the majority and elite class of the Lebanese Christians)--Skatewalk 17:05, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

the 'Egyptian Arabic' version should be retained. First, the article does NOT say it's a separate language: it describes the situation in the first sentence. Look, for example, at American English: it says American English, not American English dialect. And it's just clumsy, as well as not being the most usual way to express the subject of the article (199k hits vs. 2.7k), which is wikipedia policy. Please address these issues if you're not happy, rather than just reverting. Drmaik 05:30, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see its listed with Hijazi, Yemeni, Libyan, Syrian Arabic dialects. I stopped editing the infobox.--Skatewalk 17:30, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could Skatewalk, Zerida, and Drmaik please stop reverting each other? Keep the discussion in the talk page and don't edit the article until you're sure there's agreement. Thank you. Ƶ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi] 22:51, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately there does not seem to much genuine discussion here: reasons for not having 'dialect' in the first sentence are advanced, but the replies to these by Skatewalk do not even attempt to answer those reasons. Rather, the user seems to perceive the article claims that Egyptian Arabic is an independent language, which it does not. There may be ways to better nuance things in the intro, but the current reverts are not acheiving that. I do think that it would be good to find a better source for the status as national language, though. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Drmaik (talk • contribs) 07:27, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately there does not seem to much genuine discussion here That's putting it mildly. I am not required to answer to paranoid conspiratorial thinking and hostility as a way to conduct a discussion. I don't see any genuine attempt or motivation to improve the article, only antagonism, insults and disruption here and on related articles. The article has been stable for a long time -- editors who sincerely want to improve the article should engage in civil and courteous discourse (which at least Maha has done) until a consensus is reached. — Zerida 07:47, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Taking Skatewalk's lead, I looked at many of the lects listed at varieties of Arabic. Here's a sizeable list showing how they're worded:
This article states that Egyptian Arabic is "part of the Arabic macrolanguage of the Semitic branch of the Afro-Asiatic language family." with macrolanguage (quite unusually) linking to an outside website. This certainly is worded differently than the other Arabic lect pages. I would imagine that we might want some consistency among these pages so that either most of these should be worded similarly to this page, or this page should have its first sentence state that Egyptian Arabic "is a variety of the Arabic language spoken in Egypt." Ƶ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi] 09:35, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Per Aeusoes, "dialect" or "variety of" is appropriate here. It's the correct terminology and in line with other articles on the subject. Tiamut 16:22, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Aeusoes. I think your suggestion is quite a good one, but I'd like to hear from other editors before we use it. Drmaik 18:00, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I too think the suggestion to include "variety" is agreeable (which is actually mentioned later in the lead), but it's important to retain the linguistic classification as with other language articles (e.g.; Cantonese). All the articles on the Arabic varieties should include the classification as well. I realize now that macrolanguage has an article, so we could reduce the link to a footnote and link to the main article instead. Maybe reword like this: "Egyptian Arabic (Maṣrī مصري) is one of the varieties of the Arabic macrolanguage, a member of the Semitic branch of the Afro-Asiatic language family[1]"? — Zerida 20:45, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Three things:
  1. Is it redundant to put the description "a member of the Semitic branch of the Afro-Asiatic language family" when that information is given clearly (and in greater detail) in the infobox?
  2. If we say Egyptian is part of the "Arabic macrolanguage", we should say this about all the varieties in their respective pages or have clear criteria for which ones are varieties of Arabic (language) and which are varieties of the Arabic macrolanguage.
  3. Skatewalk has pointed out on my talk page (not sure why he doesn't want to talk here) that the lead section also says "While it is essentially a spoken language, it is encountered in written form in novels, plays, poems." We might want to change that to variety. Ƶ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi] 21:19, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with 2, disagree with 1 and 3. With regard to number 2, all the varieties of Arabic are part of the Arabic macrolanguage, and I think all articles should indicate something to that effect. The main article on Arabic reflects this in the introduction, saying "Modern Arabic is classified as a macrolanguage with 27 sub-languages in ISO 639-3." I am a bit puzzled by number 1 since many if not most language articles include a brief description of the genetic classification in the lead.
Number 3 is the most problematic. "Skatewalk has pointed out on my talk page... We might want to change that..." suggests that we should change it only because that's what Skatewalk wants. I can easily come up with 4 or 5 scholarly references that describe Egyptian Arabic as a "spoken language" -- that's what diglossia entails and those familiar with Arabic linguistics are likely to want to see that understanding reflected in the article. I looked into the history to see how this was added [2], and it makes perfect sense.
Maintaining NPOV on the "language-dialect" question does not necessitate that we eliminate all references to Egyptian being a dialect or a language. It is described interchangeably as a dialect, a language, a variety and a vernacular throughout the article, because all of them are accurate and descriptive terms. There should not be any undue insistence on its being either a dialect or language to the exclusion of the other (i.e., "Egyptian Arabic is a dialect not a language" or the other way around). See archived discussions for different views expressed on the same subject. — Zerida 22:38, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I mentioned Skatewalk because I was giving credit to his pointing it out, not because I was suggesting that we should do it only because he suggested it.
As far as 1, if we prefer to have the phrase "a member of the Semitic branch of the Afro-Asiatic language family" in this article then it would also go in the other Arabic variety articles. Ƶ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi] 02:41, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I envisage that the phrase “Arabic Macrolanguage” will become very controversial and may be a cause of future editing disputes, it does not really matter whether the description is “scientific” or not. I know that because describing Arabic as a macrolanguage instantaneously offended me, I’m sure it will do the same with others. Exporting the phrase to other dialect pages might further ignite the issue. I may be exaggerating, but I don’t think so. Just a thought. --Maha Odeh 09:47, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So how come it didn't "instantaneously offend" you when you saw it on the Arabic language article? Why does your group of friends on Wikipedia pick on Egypt articles and Egyptians at every opportunity they get? Egyegy 17:49, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
people, in my point of view what your doing is pointless, there is no such Language as Masri, its a Dialect,its like making southern Dialect in the US as a seperate language from English... and i think this entire dozens of lines long debate is Useless, because if it is decided that there is a seperate language called Masri or Egyptian Wikipedia will loose its credibility, and i doubt any Arabic Speaker will have the same respcet to Wikipedia as they did before, i mean why not put the tons of Effort that you guys did in this debate into something more Usefull, its a fact and not negotiable that Egyptian Arabic is a dialect, it has the same basics, Pronounciation, Grammer, and structure of Arabic, it is like all other languages of the World Affected by other languages such as English, French, Coptic... would Enlish be considered an Arabic Dialect just because it includeds several Arabic Words???

anyways, no such language as masri, its an acent, other Arabs understand it easily... does that mean that the entire Arab world knows another language, no its just the simple fact that Masri is a Dialect in the Arabic Language, and is found in the Northern part of Egypt, since the south of Egypt (Upper Egypt) has a completely different Dialect called Saeedi, whilc Coastal Egypt has another, and Wahati Egypt has another, and Sinai has another Dialect, or shoud i say that Egypt alone has over 5 major languages divided from the Arabic Language... because in that sense we will be lookng at over 100 new languages!!!

so perhaps we should do the same with Texas, California, New york, Alaska, and declare each state with its own language...

Why is there an Anti-Arab related topics wave in Wikipedia, starting from a useless made Map in the Arab world, identifiying the Arabic Speakers rather then Arab States to minimize the Land Area, all the way to Arabs, and discludding Egyptians from the Arab World, just because a couple of people say that Egypt is not part of the Arab World and isnt an Arab state doesnt make it a fact... if you come to Egypt and Ask the Average Egyptian he will aknowledge himself/Herself as an Arab Egyptian... this is becoming rediculous...

--Arab League User 12:13, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

blah... blah... blah... blah......
Nobody is trying to make the article say that it's a language and not a dialect. The article reflects that there is voice to both notions and we are attempting to keep the article neutral on the matter. Linguistically speaking, there is no clear-cut difference between a language and a dialect anyway.
If you feel that there is part of the article that gives undue weight to the notion of Masri being a language, then mention it and we can discuss it. Ƶ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi] 19:35, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus[edit]

User:Skatewalk has been indefinitely blocked for being a sockpuppet of User:Serenesoulnyc. However, some good discussions have come out of the recent chaos and acrimony. I will go ahead and make the suggested changes to the lead. If you have other suggestions, please continue the discussion here. — Zerida 20:25, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Reply: I see that you omitted the historical discussion of the dialect especially the jiim -giim. I think we have enough literature to trace the Egyptian dialect(s) to their ancestoral Arabian dialects. 9abdulla
  1. ^ Arabic macrolanguage
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Egyptian_Arabic/Archive_3&oldid=1136691750"