(PDF) Fuṣḥá, ‘āmmīyah, or both?: Towards a theoretical framework for written Cairene Arabic

This article strives to set in motion comprehensive research on the ways in which Arabic is evolving in Arabic blogs and computer mediated communication (CMC). By combining media studies, sociolinguistics and literature it examines code choice, content and mode of representation in five top ranked Egyptian blogs. We distinguish between MSA, ECA and mixed varieties and establish that all three codes may be employed. We argue that bloggers make deliberate choices regarding code, and that code-switching in CMC may function as frames for familiarizing or officialdom. We conclude that bloggers with an activist agenda tend to use ECA and a mixed variety, and educational blogs tend to use MSA and a mixed variety. Both activist and educational bloggers may employ a Bakhtinian carnivalesque mode of representation.

Editorial This special issue of the Language Scholar is dedicated to Arabic language learning and teaching in Higher Education. The idea of this issue stemmed out of a growing interest in researching Arabic language pedagogy and an increasing number of scholarship projects that investigate Arabic learning and teaching from different perspectives. Such work was witnessed in two international conferences that took place in March 2017 at the University of Leeds, then in April 2019 in Kings College, University of London. The conferences aimed to bring together researchers, scholars and teachers who share the interests and expertise in Arabic language pedagogy and who indeed presented an impressive range of contemporary topics that are being researched in order to advance the field of Teaching Arabic as a Second Language (TASL). In 2019 conference, the call for papers for this issue was announced and it has been a delight for us to receive a number of very interesting topics from colleagues in the UK and abroad who all strive to tackle issues faced by Arabic teachers and learners and suggest ways to overcome challenges, to develop and to promote the learning of Arabic in Higher Education. This issue has six papers starting with Al-Hamad and Mohamed’s paper which builds on current research on error analysis with a focus on Arabic phonology and orthography. The paper presents interesting examples of phonological and orthographical errors made by 60 participants who are all English speakers studying Arabic in the UK and it showed an inclination to revert to the closest sounds to those in English language. The paper gives good insights to Arabic teachers when planning their teaching activities to support their students getting used to new phonological and orthographical systems. The second paper by Al Tubuly looks at the extent and range of cultural knowledge found in four common Arabic textbooks and shows that although these books dedicate some sections to present Arabic culture, they lack the focus on the deep culture that is needed for proper understanding of the Arabic speaking communities, their beliefs and lifestyles. The paper helps teachers to consider the missing elements of culture that they may need to supplement into their curriculums. The third paper by Durkawi and Mouazen is a timely topic that looks at the application of the Integrated Approach (IA) in teaching and gives a practical guide to Arabic teachers who plan to use the IA in their programmes. The authors in this paper share examples of good practice and the challenges that they faced in applying the IA at different proficiency levels as well as a number of positive outcomes that they observed. Our fourth paper by El Essawi also provides analysis of Arabic textbooks on how much they focus on communication strategies. This is a topic that received very little attention in the field of TASL as communication strategies are limitedly found and even non-existent in some textbooks as revealed in this paper. El Essawi’s paper concludes with pedagogical suggestions on how to incorporate communication strategies in classroom activities and teaching materials for the objectives of orientation, exposure and practice. The fifth paper here by Golfetto shifts the readers’ attention to the students as it investigates the learning experience of Arabic heritage learners. The study, which focused on heritage learners in Italian universities, presents an argument that supports the merging of heritage and non-heritage learning classes. It lists the benefits of merging them including the creation of a more homogenous and authentic learning environment that supports linguistic variation in the class and bridges learning gaps. Finally, the issue concludes with the sixth paper by Khalil providing a comparative linguistic description of Modern Standard Arabic and the Cairene dialect at phonological, lexical and grammatical levels with many examples from the two Arabic varieties. The paper is a useful reference to learners and teachers who incorporate linguistic variation in their programmes. It also provides a framework that can easily be followed by other researchers and scholars who wish to analyse other Arabic varieties. We are grateful to all our authors who shared here their scholarship and research work and made it available to a wide range of readers. We are also deeply thankful to our reviewers, in alphabetical order, Yolanda Cerda, James Dickins, Hanem El-Farahaty, Giorgia Ferrari, Kassem Wahba and Shahira Yacout, who dedicated their time, efforts and knowledge to review these papers and provide invaluable advice. Huge thanks go to the Language Scholar managers Irene Addison-Child and Milada Walkova who put a lot of efforts on checking papers, communication with authors and reviewers and putting all of this work together. We hope that this special issue will provide a good reference for many Arabic teachers and researchers who strive to advance the field of Arabic language pedagogy. Rasha Soliman (on behalf of the Language Scholar editorial team)

The paper aims to attract attention of dialectologists to modern dialect poetry as linguistic material, suggesting that study of Haddad’s exploitation of registers of Egyptian Arabic for literary production contributes to better understanding of the living, ‘ordinary’ language, and helps to discover new horizons for research. Are units of this ordinary language capable of acquiring new meanings in poetry? How linguistic information helps the reader identify voices of various characters in a poem? The questions raised here relate to register and voice as applied to poetry, when seen as an act of communication. Yet, the question remains open, while the proposed discussion of Haddad’s verse offers some intimations for such experience.

Fuṣḥá, ‘āmmīyah, or both?: Towards a theoretical framework for written Cairene Arabic Saussan Khalil Submitted in accordance with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of Leeds Arabic, Islamic and Middle Eastern Studies School of Languages, Cultures and Societies September 2018 - ! ii I confirm that the work submitted is my own and that appropriate credit has been given where reference has been made to the work of others. This copy has been supplied on the understanding that it is copyright material and that no quotation from the thesis may be published without proper acknowledgement. The right of Saussan Khalil to be identified as Author of this work has been asserted by her in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. © 2018 The University of Leeds and Saussan Khalil - iii ! - Acknowledgements I would like to firstly thank my supervisor, Professor James Dickins for his support and encouragement throughout this study, and his endless patience and advice in guiding me on this journey. From the University of Leeds, I would like to thank Mrs Karen Priestley for her invaluable support and assistance with all administrative matters, however great or small. From the University of Cambridge, I would like to thank my colleagues Professor Amira Bennison, Dr Rachael Harris and Mrs Farida El-Keiy for their encouragement and allowing me to take the time to complete this study. I would also like to thank Dr Barry Heselwood, Professor Rex Smith, Dr Marco Santello and Dr Serge Sharoff for their input and guidance on specific topics and relevant research areas to this study. I am truly grateful to everyone that has listened to and discussed with me the topic of this study and related research, works and studies. Finally, I owe the greatest debt of gratitude to my daughters Noura and Amal for giving me strength and laughter. - iv ! - Abstract The Arabic language is a complex, diglossic language, with varying written (fuṣḥá) and spoken (‘āmmīyah) forms. While the study of mixing between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah in spoken Arabic has received some scholarly attention, far less attention has been paid to mixing in writing, which this study seeks to address. Badawi’s (1973) landmark study of Egyptian Arabic use identified five language levels, assuming naturally that written Arabic exists as either Classical or Modern Standard Arabic, while mixing between written and spoken forms is reserved as a feature of Educated Spoken Arabic (ESA), despite the proliferation of mixed literary works by renowned writers such as Tawfiq al-Hakim, Yusuf Idris and Yusuf Sibai at the time. Since Badawi’s (1973) study, studies of mixed Arabic have centred around ESA (Eid, 1988; Bassiouney, 2006), uncovering to some extent the type and degree of, and motivations for, mixing, which have been used as a backdrop for the examination of mixed writing in this study. More recently, Høigilt & Mejdell (2017), Mejdell (2014), Ibrahim (2010), and Rosenbaum (2000) have identified occurrences of mixing in written Arabic. The aim of this study therefore, is to take a holistic view of Arabic writing, across different times and media, towards establishing a theoretical framework for Egyptian Arabic writing, including fuṣḥá, ‘āmmīyah and socalled ‘mixed’ forms. The catalyst for this study, as well as for the proliferation of mixed and ‘āmmīyah writing, has been the expansion of the internet and the rapid increase in online writing. For Arabic at least, the Arab Spring and social media within it, have played an important role in the widespread use of ‘āmmīyah in writing, which this study aims to place within the wider context of Arabic writing. - v! - Table of Contents Acknowledgements .....................................................................................iii Abstract ........................................................................................................iv Table of Contents .........................................................................................v List of Tables ................................................................................................ix List of Figures ...............................................................................................x Transliteration Scheme ...............................................................................xi Preface ......................................................................................................xxiii Chapter 1 Introduction ..........................................................................................1 Chapter 2 Literature Review .................................................................................7 2.1 Arabic sociolinguistics .....................................................................7 2.1.1 Diglossia ...............................................................................9 2.1.2 Arabic Language Levels .....................................................10 2.1.3 Educated Spoken Arabic (ESA) .........................................13 2.1.4 Arabic language continuum/multiglossia ............................15 2.1.5 ‘āmmīyah in writing.............................................................17 2.1.5.1 Middle Arabic ............................................................17 2.1.5.2 Zajal poetry and early print media ...........................19 2.1.5.3 Modern drama and fiction .......................................19 2.1.5.4 The role of gender in ‘āmmiyyah writing .................19 2.2 Internet linguistics ..........................................................................21 2.2.1 English Internet linguistics ..................................................21 2.2.2 Arabic Internet linguistics (studies of Arabic language use online) ..................................................................................23 2.3 Social media and the Arab Spring - the role of online political activism ........................................................................................25 Chapter 3 Review of existing theoretical frameworks ......................................30 3.1 Code-switching and mixing ...........................................................31 3.1.1 Code-switching in speaking ...............................................31 3.1.1.1 Principles of Code-Switching (Eid, 1988) ................32 3.1.1.2 Mixing, and stylistic variation (Mejdell, 2011-12) .....35 3.1.2 Code-switching in writing....................................................36 3.1.2.1 Analytical framework for multilingualism in written discourse (Sebba, 2012) ..............................................37 - vi ! 3.1.2.2 Local - global functions of code-switching in writing (Jonsson, 2012) ...........................................................39 3.1.2.3 Written code-switching in opposition newspapers (Ibrahim, 2010) .............................................................39 3.3 Translanguaging ............................................................................41 3.4 Intermediate Arabic .......................................................................42 3.4.1 Tawfiq al- Hakim’s ‘Third Language’ ...................................43 3.4.2 Yusuf Sibai (1917-1978) .....................................................46 3.4.2.1 Borrowing ................................................................48 3.4.2.2 Use of ‘low-Standard’ vocabulary ............................50 3.4.2.3 Reshaping of ‘āmmīyah expressions ......................52 3.4.2.4 Elimination of case contrasts from some nouns and adjectives .....................................................................55 3.4.3 Yusuf Idris (1927-91) ..........................................................55 3.4.4 Strategic Bivalency .............................................................58 3.4.5 Fuṣḥāmmīyah .....................................................................63 3.5 ‘āmmīyah writing ...........................................................................71 3.5.1 Pre-internet ‘āmmīyah writing .............................................73 3.5.2 Print & online ‘āmmīyah writing ..........................................74 Chapter 4 Proposed Theoretical Framework ....................................................75 4.1 Summary of variations between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah ...................77 4.1.1 Phonological variation ........................................................78 4.1.1.1 Expected letter variation ..........................................78 4.1.1.2 Short vowel variation ...............................................82 4.1.1.3 Morpho-phonological variation ................................83 4.1.1.4 Syllable variation .....................................................83 4.1.1.5 Undefined phonological variation ............................83 4.1.2 Lexical variation ..................................................................84 4.1.2.1 Morphological lexical variation ................................84 4.1.2.2 Preferential/stylistic variation ..................................84 4.1.2.3 Foreign or loan words .............................................85 4.1.2.4 Undefined lexical variation ......................................85 4.1.3 Grammatical (morphological and syntactic) variation ........86 4.1.3.1 Pronouns .................................................................86 4.1.3.2 Dual forms ...............................................................88 4.1.3.3 SV-VS order preference and agreement .................88 - ! vii 4.1.3.4 Verb conjugations ...................................................88 4.1.3.5 Future tense marker ................................................88 4.1.3.6 Case and mood inflections (indicative, accusative, genitive and jussive).....................................................89 4.1.3.7 Noun and verb negation ..........................................90 4.1.3.8 Number-noun agreement ........................................90 4.1.3.9 Interrogatives ..........................................................91 4.2 The proposed theoretical framework: 7 Arabic writing styles ........93 Chapter 5 6th April Youth Movement Facebook page study ...........................97 5.1 Methodology ..................................................................................97 5.1.1 Data selection .....................................................................99 5.1.2 Data organisation ...............................................................99 5.1.3 Data categorisation ..........................................................100 5.2 Findings .......................................................................................102 5.3 Analysis .......................................................................................106 5.3.1 Modern Standard Arabic (MSA) posts ..............................106 5.3.1.1 Formal posts..................................................................106 5.3.1.2 Announcements .............................................................112 5.3.1.3 Knowledge, learning and religion ..................................113 5.3.1.4 Photo and video captions ..............................................114 5.3.1.5 Invitations, opinion polls, surveys and questions to the collective members of the group ........................................116 5.3.1.6 Reports and quotes .......................................................119 5.3.2 Colloquial Written Arabic (CWA) and Intermediate Arabic (IA) posts ............................................................................120 5.3.2.1 Cartoons, jokes and satire ....................................121 5.3.2.2 Appeals .................................................................127 5.3.2.3 Ideas, thoughts and feelings .................................132 5.3.2.4 Photo and video commentaries.............................135 5.3.2.5 Opinion polls and surveys .....................................141 5.3.2.6 Slogans .................................................................145 Chapter 6 Comparative review of mixed-style studies...................................148 6.1 Online blogs (Ramsay, 2012) .......................................................148 6.2 Twitter (Kosoff, 2014) ..................................................................154 6.3 Satire (Håland, 2017) ..................................................................158 - viii ! 6.4 Conclusions .................................................................................162 Chapter 7 Conclusions ......................................................................................163 7.1 Overview of the study ..................................................................163 7.2 Arabic as a unified language .......................................................164 7.3 The role of political activism in ‘āmmīyah writing ........................164 7.4 Social media and the Arab Spring as catalysts for language change ....... 165 7.5 The proposed theoretical framework ...........................................166 7.6 Limitations of the study and areas for further research ...............169 7.7 Impact ..........................................................................................170 7.8 Implications .................................................................................171 Bibliography ..............................................................................................172 List of Abbreviations ................................................................................184 Appendix ...................................................................................................185 A.1 Formal/Official posts ...................................................................185 A.2 Announcements ..........................................................................186 A.3 Knowledge, learning and religion ................................................188 A.4 Photo and video captions (pre-December 2010) ........................189 A.5 Invitations, opinion polls, surveys and questions to the collective members of the group ................................................................190 A.6 Reports and quotes .....................................................................194 A.7 Appeals .......................................................................................194 A.8 Slogans .......................................................................................195 Post A.8.1 ..................................................................................195 A.9 Cartoons, humour and satire ......................................................196 A.10 Ideas, thoughts and feelings .....................................................198 A.11 Photo and video commentaries .................................................200 A.12 Appeals .....................................................................................203 - ix ! - List of Tables Table 0.1 Library of Congress Romanisation scheme for Arabic .........xii Table 3.1 Summary of Eid’s code-switching principles .........................35 Table 3.2 Examples of ‘āmmīyah words and expressions as categorised by Abdel-Malek (1972) ...................................................49 Table 3.3 Fuṣḥá levels and example vocabulary ....................................51 Table 3.4 Examples of reshaped ‘āmmīyah expressions .......................52 Table 4.1 Interdental sound shifts in Egyptian ‘āmmīyah ......................79 Table 4.2 Diphthong sound shifts in Egyptian ‘āmmīyah ......................81 Table 4.3 Summary of expected letter variation between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah .............................................................................................82 Table 4.4 Examples of undefined phonological variation ......................83 Table 4.5 Examples of morphological lexical variation .........................84 Table 4.6 Examples of preferential/stylistic variation ............................84 Table 4.7 Examples of foreign words ......................................................85 Table 4.8 Examples of undefined lexical variation .................................85 Table 4.7 Personal pronouns in fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah ............................86 Table 4.8 Demonstrative pronouns in fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah ..................87 Table 4.9 Examples of case and mood inflections absent in ‘āmmīyah ... 89 Table 4.10 Summary number-noun agreement rules for numbers 1-100 . 91 Table 4.11 Interrogatives in fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah ...................................92 Table 5.1 Data categories grouped by linguistic style and motivations .. 101 - x! - List of Figures Figure 2.1 Distribution of fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah characteristics between Badawi’s levels. ..................................................................................11 Figure 4.1 Summary variations between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah. ............77 - xi ! - Transliteration Scheme The Transliteration scheme used in this study is the Library of Congress Romanisation scheme for Arabic1 , copied verbatim in Table 0.1 and the notes below. For writers with standard English forms, e.g. ‘Yusuf Idris’, these forms are used, rather than strict transliterations. For transliteration of ‘āmmīyah terms, the phoneme /g/ is used for ‫ ج‬and for the pronunciation of the diphthongs /aw/ and /ay/ in ‘āmmīyah the IPA symbols /o:/ and /e:/ are used (see Table 0.1 below; for a discussion see Chapter 4). In transliterations of CWA, some adaptations have been made, such as using wi- for the connective ‫ و‬instead of wa- (see 16.b below) and il for the definite article ‫ اﻟـ‬rather than al (see 17 below). For transliteration of IA, LIA and bivalent/shared terms, MSA transliteration has been used. 1 Available from https://www.loc.gov/catdir/cpso/romanization/arabic.pdf - ! xii Table 0.1 Library of Congress Romanisation scheme for Arabic Letters of the alphabet Romanisation ‫ا‬ omit (see Note 1) ‫ب‬ b ‫ت‬ t ‫ث‬ th ‫ج‬ j ‫ح‬ ḥ ‫خ‬ kh ‫د‬ d ‫ذ‬ dh ‫ر‬ r ‫ز‬ z ‫س‬ s ‫ش‬ sh ‫ص‬ ṣ ‫ض‬ ḍ ‫ط‬ ṭ ‫ظ‬ ẓ ‫ع‬ ‘ ‫غ‬ gh ‫ف‬ f (see Note 2) ‫ق‬ q (see Note 2) ‫ك‬ k ‫ل‬ l ‫م‬ m ‫ن‬ n ‫ ة‬، ‫ھـ‬ h (see Note 3) ‫و‬ w ‫ي‬ y - xiii ! Vowels and Diphthongs Romanisation َ a ُ u ِ i ‫َا‬ ā (see Rule 5) ‫َى‬ á (see Rule 6(a)) ‫ُو‬ ū ‫ِى‬ ī ‫َْو‬ aw (IPA /o:/ in CWA) ْ‫َى‬ ay (IPA /e:/ in CWA) Notes 1. For the use of alif to support hamzah, see rule 2. For the romanisation of hamzah by the consonantal sign ’ (alif), see rule 8(a). For other orthographic uses of alif see rules 3-5. 2. The Maghribī variations ‫ ڢ‬and ‫ ڧ‬are romanised f and q respectively. 3 . ‫ ة‬in a word in the construct state is romanised t. See rule 7(b). Rules of application Arabic letters romanised in different ways depending on their context: 1. As indicated in the table, ‫ و‬and ‫ ي‬may represent: (a) The consonants romanised w and y, respectively. waḍ‘ ‫وﺿﻊ‬ ‘iwaḍ ‫ﻋوض‬ dalw ‫دﻟو‬ yad ‫ﯾد‬ ḥiyal ‫ﺣﯾل‬ ṭahy ‫طﮭﻲ‬ (b) The long vowels romanised ū, ī, and ā respectively. ūlá ‫أوﻟﻰ‬ ṣūrah ‫ﺻورة‬ - xiv ! dhū ‫ذو‬ īmān ‫إﯾﻣﺎن‬ jīl ‫ﺟﯾل‬ fī ‫ﻓﻲ‬ kitāb ‫ﻛﺗﺎب‬ saḥāb ‫ﺳﺣﺎب‬ jumān ‫ﺟﻣﺎن‬ See also rules 11(a) and 11(b)(1-2). (c) The diphthongs romanized aw and ay, respectively. awj ‫أوج‬ nawm ‫ﻧوم‬ law ‫ﻟو‬ aysar ‫أﯾﺳر‬ shaykh ‫ﺷﯾﺦ‬ ‘aynay ‫ﻋﯾﻧﻲ‬ See also rules 11(a)(2) and 11(b)(3). 2. ‫( ا‬alif), ‫ و‬and ‫ ى‬when used to support ‫( ء‬hamzah) are not represented in romanisation. See rule 8(a). 3. ‫( ا‬alif) when used to support ‫( ٱ‬waṣlah) and ‫( آ‬maddah) is not represented in romanisation. See rules 9 and 10. 4. ‫ا‬ (alif) and ‫و‬ when used as orthographic signs without phonetic significance are not represented in romanisation. fa‘alū ‫ﻓﻌﻠوا‬ ulā’ika ‫أوﻻﺋك‬ ūqīyah ‫أوﻗﯾﺔ‬ See also rule 12 and examples cited in rules 23-26. 5. ‫( ا‬alif) is used to represent the long vowel romanised ā, as indicated in Table 0.1 - xv ! fā‘il ‫ﻓﺎﻋل‬ riḍā ‫رﺿﺎ‬ This alif, when medial, is sometimes omitted in Arabic; it is always indicated in romanisation. See rule 19. 6. Final ‫ ى‬appears in the following special cases: (a) As ‫( ◌َ ى‬alif maqṣūrah) used in place of َ ‫ ◌ا‬to represent the long vowel romanized ā. ḥattá ‫ﺣ ﱠﺗﻰ‬ maḍá ‫ﻣﺿﻰ‬ َ kubrá ‫ﻛﺑرى‬ َ Yaḥyá ‫ﯾﺣ َﯾﻰ‬ musammá ‫ﻣﺳﻣﱠﻰ‬ Muṣṭafá ‫ﻣﺻط َﻔﻰ‬ (b) As ّ‫ ◌ِ ى‬in nouns and adjectives of the form fā‘īl which are derived from defective roots. This ending is romanised ī, not īy, without regard to the presence of ◌ ّ (shaddah). See rule 11(b)(2). Raḍī al-Dīn ‫رﺿﻲ اﻟدﯾن‬ Compare the fa‘īl form of the same root ‫[ اﻟرﺿﻰ‬without shaddah] al-Raḍī. (c) As ّ‫ ◌ِ ى‬in the relative adjective (nisbah). The ending, like (b) above, is romanised ī, not īy. al-Miṣrī ّ‫اﻟﻣﺻري‬ ِ Compare ‫اﻟﻣﺻرﯾّﺔ‬ al-Miṣrīyah and see rule 11(b)(1). ِ 7. ‫( ة‬tā’ marbūṭah) (a) When the noun or adjective ending in ‫ ة‬is indefinite, or is preceded by the definite article, ‫ ة‬is romanised h. The in ‫ ة‬such positions is often replaced by ‫ه‬. ṣalāh ‫ﺻﻼة‬ al-Risālah al-bahīyah mir’āh ‫اﻟرﺳﺎﻟﺔ اﻟﺑﮭﯾﺔ ﻣرآة‬ Urjūzah fī al-ṭibb ‫أرﺟوزة ﻓﻰ اﻟطب‬ - xvi ! (b) When the word ending in ‫ ة‬is in the construct state [muḍāf wa-muḍāf ilayh], ‫ ة‬is romanised t. Wizārat al-Tarbiyah ‫وزارة اﻟﺗرﺑﯾﺔ‬ Mir’āt al-zamān ‫ﻣرآة اﻟزﻣﺎن‬ (c) When the word ending in ‫ ة‬is used adverbially, ‫( ة‬vocalisedً ‫ )ة‬is romanised tan. See rule 12(b). Romanisation of Arabic orthographic symbols other than letters and vowel signs The signs listed below are frequently omitted from unvocalised Arabic writing and printing; their presence or absence must then be inferred. They are represented in romanisation according to the following rules: 8. ‫( ء‬hamzah) (a) In initial position, whether at the beginning of a word, following a prefixed preposition or conjunction, or following the definite article, ‫ ء‬is not represented in romanisation. When medial or final, ‫ ء‬is romanised as ’ (alif). asad ‫أﺳد‬ uns ‫أﻧس‬ idhā ‫إذا‬ mas’alah ‫ﻣﺳﺄﻟﺔ‬ mu’tamar ‫ﻣؤﺗﻣر‬ 9. (waṣlah), like initial ‫ء‬, is not represented in romanisation. See also rule 8(b) above. When the alif which supports waṣlah belongs to the article ‫ال‬, the initial vowel of the article is romanised a. See rule 17(b). In other words, beginning with hamzat al-waṣl, the initial vowel is romanised i. Riḥlat Ibn Jubayr ‫رحلة ٱبن جبير‬ al-istidrāk ‫اإلستدراك‬ kutub iqtanatʹhā ‫ﻛﺗب ٱﻗﺗﻧﺗﮭﺎ‬ bi-ihtimām ‘Abd al-Majīd ‫ﺑﺎھﺗﻣﺎم ﻋﺑد ٱﻟﻣﺟﯾد‬ 10. ̃ (maddah) - ! xvii (a) Initial ‫ آ‬is romanised ā. ālah ‫آﻟﺔ‬ Kullīyat al-Ādāb ‫ﻛﻠﯾﺔ اﻵداب‬ (b) Medial ‫آ‬, when it represents the phonetic combination ’ā, is so romanised. ta’ālīf ‫ﺗﺂﻟﯾف‬ ma’āthir ‫ﻣﺂﺛر‬ (c) ̃ is otherwise not represented in romanisation. khulafā’ ‫ﺧﻠﻔﺂء‬ 11. ّ◌ (shaddah or tashdīd) (a) Over ‫ و‬: (1) ّ‫ُو‬, representing the combination of long vowel plus consonant, is romanised ūw. adūw ّ‫ﻋ ُدو‬ qūwah ‫ﻗُوّ ة‬ See also rule 1(b). (2) ّ‫َو‬, representing the combination of diphthong plus consonant, is romanised aww. Shawwāl ‫َﺷوّ ال‬ ṣawwara ‫ﺻوّ ر‬ َ jaww ّ‫ﺟو‬ See also rule 1(c). (b) Over ‫ى‬: (1) Medial ‫ى‬ ‫◌ ﱢ‬, representing the combination of long vowel plus consonant, is romanised īy. al-Miṣrīyah ‫اﻟﻣﺻرﯾّﺔ‬ ِ See also rule 1(b). (2) Final ‫ى‬ ‫ ◌ ﱢ‬is romanised ī. See rules 6(b) and 6(c). - xviii ! (3) Medial and final ‫ى‬ ‫◌ ﱠ‬, representing the combination of diphthong plus consonant, is romanised ayy. ayyām ‫أَﯾّﺎم‬ sayyid ‫َﺳﯾّد‬ Quṣayy ّ‫ﻗﺻﻲ‬ َ See also rule 1(c). (c) Over other letters,ّ ◌ is represented in romanisation by doubling the letter or digraph concerned. al-Ghazzī ّ ّ‫اﻟﻐزي‬ al-Kashshāf ّ ‫اﻟﻛ‬ ‫ﺷﺎف‬ 12. Tanwīn may take the written form ◌ ٌ , ً◌ (ً‫)◌ا‬, or ٍ◌, romanised un, an, and in, respectively. Tanwīn is normally disregarded in romanisation, however. It is indicated in the following cases: (a) When it occurs in indefinite nouns derived from defective roots. qāḍin ‫ﻗﺎض‬ ٍ ma‘nan ً‫ﻣﻌﻧﻰ‬ (b) When it indicates the adverbial use of a noun or adjective. ṭab‘an ‫طﺑﻌًﺎ‬ faj’atan ‫ﻓﺟﺄ ًة‬ al-Mushtarik waḍ‘an ً ‫اﻟﻣﺷﺗرك وﺿﻌﺎ‬ wa-al-muftariq ṣuq‘an ً ‫واﻟﻣﻔﺗرق ﺻﻘﻌﺎ‬ Grammatical structure as it affects romanisation 13. Final inflections of verbs are retained in romanisation, except in pause. man waliya Miṣr ‫ﻣن وﻟﻲ ﻣﺻر‬ ma‘rifat mā yajibu la-hum ‫ﻣﻌرﻓﺔ ﻣﺎ ﯾﺟب ﻟﮭم‬ ṣallá Allāh ‘alayhi wa-sallam ‫ﺻﻠﻰ ﷲ ﻋﻠﯾﮫ وﺳﻠم‬ al-Lu’lu’ al-maknūn fī ḥukm ‫اﻟﻠؤﻟؤ اﻟﻣﻛﻧون ﻓﻰ ﺣﻛم‬ al-ikhbār ‘ammā sa-yakūn ‫اﻹﺧﺑﺎر ﻋﻣﺎ ﺳﯾﻛون‬ 14. Final inflections of nouns and adjectives: - xix ! (a) Vocalic endings are not represented in romanization, except preceding pronominal suffixes, and except when the text being romanized is in verse. uṣūluhā al-nafsīyah wa-ṭuruq tadrīsihā ‫أﺻوﻟﮭﺎ اﻟﻧﻔﺳﯾﺔ وطرق ﺗدرﯾﺳﮭﺎ‬ ilá yawminā hādhā ‫اﻟﻰ ﯾوﻣﻧﺎ ھذا‬ (b) Tanwīn is not represented in romanization, except as specified in rule 12. (c) ‫( ة‬tā’ marbūṭah) is romanised h or t as specified in rule 7. (d) For the romanisation of the relative adjective (nisbah) see rule 6(c). 15. Pronouns, pronominal suffixes, and demonstratives: (a) Vocalic endings are retained in romanisation. anā wa-anta ‫اﻧﺎ واﻧت‬ hādhihi al-ḥāl ‫ھذه اﻟﺣﺎل‬ mu’allafātuhu wa-shurūḥuhā ‫ﻣؤﻟﻔﺎﺗﮫ وﺷروﺣﮭﺎ‬ (b) At the close of a phrase or sentence, the ending is romanised in its pausal form. ḥayātuhu wa-‘aṣruh ‫ﺣﯾﺎﺗﮫ وﻋﺻره‬ Tawfīq al-Ḥakīm, afkāruh āthāruh ‫ آﺛﺎره‬،‫ أﻓﻛﺎره‬،‫ﺗوﻓﯾق اﻟﺣﻛﯾم‬ 16. Prepositions and conjunctions: (a) Final vowels of separable prepositions and conjunctions are retained in romanisation. anna ‫أن‬ annahu ‫أﻧﮫ‬ bayna yadayhi ‫ﺑﯾن ﯾدﯾﮫ‬ Note the special cases: ‫ ﻣﻣﺎ‬mimmā, ‫ ﻣﻣن‬mimman. (b) Inseparable prepositions, conjunctions, and other prefixes are connected with what follows by a hyphen. bi-hi ‫ﺑﮫ‬ wa-ma‘ahu ‫وﻣﻌﮫ‬ lā-silkī ‫ﻻﺳﻠﻛﻲ‬ 17. The definite article: - xx ! (a) The romanised form al is connected with the following word by a hyphen. al-kitāb al-thānī ‫اﻟﻛﺗﺎب اﻟﺛﺎﻧﻲ‬ al-ittiḥād ‫اﻹﺗﺣﺎد‬ al-aṣl ‫اﻷﺻل‬ al-āthār ‫اﻵﺛﺎر‬ (b) When ‫ ال‬is initial in the word, and when it follows an inseparable preposition or conjunction, it is always romanised al regardless of whether the preceding word, as romanised, ends in a vowel or a consonant. ilá al-ān ‫اﻟﻰ اﻵن‬ Abū al-Wafā’ ‫اﺑو اﻟوﻓﺎء‬ Maktabat al-Nahḍah al-Miṣrīyah ‫ﻣﻛﺗﺑﺔ اﻟﻧﮭﺿﺔ اﻟﻣﺻرﯾﺔ‬ bi-al-tamām wa-al-kamāl ‫ﺑﺎﻟﺗﻣﺎم واﻟﻛﻣﺎل‬ Note the exceptional treatment of the preposition ‫ ل‬followed by the article: lil-Shirbīnī ‫ﻟﻠﺷرﺑﯾﻧﻲ‬ See also rule 23. (c) The ‫ ل‬of the article is always romanised l, whether it is followed by a “sun letter” or not, i.e., regardless of whether or not it is assimilated in pronunciation to the initial consonant of the word to which it is attached. al-ḥurūf al-abjadīyah ‫اﻟﺣروف اﻷﺑﺟدﯾﺔ‬ Abū al-Layth al-Samarqandī ‫اﺑو اﻟﻠﯾث اﻟﺳﻣرﻗﻧدي‬ Orthography of Arabic in romanisation 18. Capitalisation: (a) Rules for the capitalisation of English are followed, except that the definite article al is given in lower case in all positions. (b) Diacritics are used with both upper and lower case letters. al-Ījī ‫اﻻﯾﺟﻲ‬ al-Ālūsī ‫اﻵﻟوﺳﻲ‬ 19. The macron or the acute accent, as appropriate, is used to indicate all long vowels, including those which in Arabic script are written defectively. - xxi ! The macron or the acute accent, as the case may be, is retained over final long vowels which are shortened in pronunciation before hamzat alwaṣl. Ibrāhīm Dā’ūd ‫ داؤد‬، ‫ إﺑرھﯾم داؤود‬، ‫إﺑراھﯾم‬ Abū al-Ḥasan ru’ūs ‫اﺑو اﻟﺣﺳن رؤوس‬ dhālika ‫ذﻟك‬ ‘alá al-‘ayn ‫ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﻌﯾن‬ 20. The hyphen is used: (a) To connect the definite article al with the word to which it is attached. See rule 17(a). (b) Between an inseparable prefix and what follows. See rules 16(b) and 17(b) above. (c) Between bin and the following element in personal names when they are written in Arabic as a single word. See rule 25. 21. The prime (ʹ) is used: (a) To separate two letters representing two distinct consonantal sounds, when the combination might otherwise be read as a digraph. Adʹham ‫أدھم‬ akramatʹhā ‫أﻛرﻣﺗﮭﺎ‬ (b) To mark the use of a letter in its final form when it occurs in the middle of a word. Qal‘ahʹjī ‫ﻗﻠﻌﮭﺟﻰ‬ Shaykhʹzādah ‫ﺷﯾﺧزاده‬ 22. As in the case of romanisation from other languages, foreign words which occur in an Arabic context and are written in Arabic letters are romanised according to the rules for romanising Arabic. Jārmānūs (not Germanos nor Germanus) ‫ﺟﺎرﻣﺎﻧوس‬ Lūrd Ghrānfīl (not Lord Granville) ‫ﻟورد ﻏراﻧﻔﯾل‬ Īsāghūjī (not Isagoge) ‫اﯾﺳﺎﻏوﺟﻲ‬ For short vowels not indicated in the Arabic, the Arabic vowel nearest to the original pronunciation is supplied. Gharsiyā Khayin (not García Jaén) ‫ﻏرﺳﯾﺎ ﺧﯾن‬ - ! xxii Examples of Irregular Arabic orthography 23. Note the romanisation of ‫ﷲ‬, alone and in combination. Allāh ‫ﷲ‬ billāh …‫ﺑﺎ‬ lillāh … bismillāh ‫ﺑﺳم ﷲ‬ al-Mustanṣir billāh …‫اﻟﻣﺳﺗﻧﺻر ﺑﺎ‬ 24. Note the romanisation of the following personal names: Ṭāhā ‫طﮫ‬ Yāsīn ‫ ﯾﺳن‬،‫ﯾس‬ ‘Amr ‫ﻋﻣرو‬ Bahjat ‫ ﺑﮭﺟﺔ‬،‫ﺑﮭﺟت‬ 25. ‫ اﺑن‬and ‫ ﺑن‬are both romanised ibn in all positions. Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad ibn Abī al-Rabī ‫اﺣﻣد ﺑن ﻣﺣﻣد ﺑن اﺑﻲ اﻟرﺑﯾﻊ‬ Sharḥ ibn ‘Aqīl ‘alá Alfīyat ibn Mālik ‫ﺷرح اﺑن ﻋﻘﯾل ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﻔﯾﺔ اﺑن ﻣﺎﻟك‬ Exception is made in the case of modern names, typically North African, in which the element ‫ ﺑن‬is pronounced bin. Bin Khiddah ‫ﺑن ﺧده‬ Bin-‘Abd Allāh ‫ﺑﻧﻌﺑد ﷲ‬ 26. Note the anomalous spelling ‫ﻣﺎﺋﺔ‬, romanised mi’ah. - xxiii ! - Preface The Arab Spring is one of the most remarkable and significant moments in recent memory in the Arab world and resonated globally, as people witnessed revolt against decades-strong autocratic regimes. At the time the uprisings were unforeseen and seemed to come out of nowhere to experts and laypeople alike. Since the uprisings, much analysis has been done to try and understand how these uprisings came to be, what their impact has been and what they may lead to in the future. Despite the outcome of these remarkable uprisings and their range, from regime change to civil war, their impact is still being felt globally today. Much has been made of the role of the internet and online communication tools in the facilitation of the uprisings, at least initially, but much less attention has been paid to the language used online to formulate the messages that were communicated to thousands of followers, undetected by the notorious security services. In the case of Egypt in particular, I witnessed with amazement the simple, bold, articulate messages being posted and shared online by a new generation of online youth political activists. They were expressing messages of hope for change, of anger and the power of the collective will to change a reality that was becoming more oppressive by the day. This generation’s tipping point came after the brutal broad-daylight torture and murder of a young, local man, at the hands of the Egyptian security forces for daring to post images of police brutality in Egypt online. Working online to spread the news and messages of discontent, and organising protest events, the language of choice for these activists showed a clear break with tradition, for they did not write in the Standard variety of Arabic found in newspapers and other forms of traditional political discourse, but started to write in the colloquial variety, in effect finding a more genuine voice for themselves that set them apart from the political establishments of the regime and the opposition. This study began in 2011 by following one of the most influential youth political activist groups at the time, the 6th April Youth Movement and their Facebook page, the 6th April Youth Movement Facebook page, which was used for communicating with the group’s members and followers. The - xxiv ! study first came to be as an initial observation by a curious researcher of what appeared to be a novel use of language, bearing the hallmarks of speech, but in writing. As the Arabic language is known for its use of a strict Standard variety for writing, which is separate from the spoken form used for everyday communication, this at first appeared to be something of a novelty, quite unique, and worthy of further investigation and research. The internet had been seen, up until the time of the uprisings in 2011, as trivial, both in content and form, by an older generation, who did not pay much attention to it, as it seemed to be used by the younger generation for gaming and chatting, and nothing much more. Part of this image of ‘frivolity’, believed this researcher, must have lain in the language used for communication and the conscious choice of using Spoken versus Standard Arabic. Now the internet plays a much greater role in all of our lives, and its use is seen across all generations and for all purposes in Egypt and around the world. Certainly in Egypt at least, its central role in daily life has come partly as a direct result of the events of 2011. And so began the journey of discovery of Arabic language use online, and later the use of Spoken Arabic forms in print writing. At the time I began this study, scholarly interest in online Arabic writing centred around the use of Latinised or Romanised Arabic, that is Arabic written in Latin or Roman script. Little to no research had been conducted around online Arabic writing in Arabic script, and to my knowledge very little research into mixed or colloquial print writing. However, after personal circumstances dictated a break from this study, and upon returning to it two years later, I found a relative abundance of new literature on mixed Arabic writing, including online writing. This became an exciting opportunity to make valuable observations and reflections on the state of Arabic writing, both online and in print, and to compare my findings with those of the new studies. It has certainly been a fascinating and enlightening journey, the results of which are shared in this study, which I hope will contribute to shining a light on the breadth and depth of written Arabic, alongside the established literary cannon. -1 ! - Chapter 1 Introduction From a sociolinguistic perspective, Arabic is a complex language with distinct forms for writing (a standard form referred to as fuṣḥá) and speaking (a non-standardised form referred to as ‘āmmīyah) in distinct social settings; a situation which has been described as ‘diglossia’. This situation is further complicated by the existence of numerous regional and local dialects. And while the diglossic situation has been well documented for spoken Arabic, when it comes to written Arabic, less attention has been paid to the influence of diglossia. In The Politics of Written Language1 , Brustad argues that the very existence of diglossia can be seen as the result of the ideology that arose at the time of the nahḍah, or Arab enlightenment at the beginning of the twentieth century, which led to the modernisation of fuṣḥá and the emergence of Modern Standard Arabic (MSA). Before this variations in the history of written Arabic were found, as well as changing attitudes and practice towards writing in the spoken form (Brustad, 2017). In fact, standardisation and destandardisation have existed in ‘waves’ over time, with standardisation waves occurring at the time of the early codification of Arabic and the nahḍah, while de-standardisation occurred with so-called ‘Middle’ Arabic, referring to a form of Classical Arabic that makes use of spoken forms and existed up to the time of the nahḍah, and the current trends of mixing standard and spoken forms of Arabic (Høigilt & Mejdell, 2017). Mixed Arabic therefore, can be seen as the ‘true’ native use of Arabic, since fuṣḥá is rarely produced other than by religious scholars or in the media (Badawi, 1973). All other evidence (Bassiouney, 2006, 2013; Mejdell, 2006, 2014) points to the mixed style as being the dominant style in formal speech, rendering diglossic or ‘level’ models as outdated or even obsolete, such that even approaching Educated Spoken Arabic (ESA) as a ‘form’ or ‘level’ would be considered equally outdated. The continuum 1 Brustad, K. 2017. Diglossia as Ideology. In: Hoigilt, J., Mejdell, G. eds. The politics of written language in the Arab world: writing change. Studies in semitic languages and linguistics; 90. Leiden; Boston: Brill, pp. 41-67. Available from: http://booksandjournals.brillonline.com/ -2 ! concept (Rickford, 1987) is an interesting one and its application to Arabic by Hary (1996) is discussed below, but it would seem native speakers have underlying intuitions and give themselves much further scope for language mixing that the model suggests. Standard Arabic, with its prescriptive grammar, can be seen on the continuum as a kind of target, which speakers may aim to hit, or aim roughly towards hitting. In more practical terms, we should view language use in terms of style and register in relation to formality or informality of situations, with the implication that formal situations ‘call for’ (have the standard linguistic correspondents of) formal language, while informal situations ‘call for’ (have the standard linguistic correspondents of) informal language; rather than having a fixed frame of reference for speech - for who nowadays, apart from newsreaders speaks completely in MSA? On the other hand, who speaks in a way that manipulates the wide range and scope of the language, to suit the the tone, register, formality of the situation and their message? This does however, raise questions about how we divide up the types of Arabic available to identify for ‘formality’ and ‘informality’ (etc.) in Arabic. As general literacy rates have risen across the Arabic-speaking world, the division between ‘educated’ and ‘non-educated’, even illiterate spoken Arabic is becoming less of an issue specific to Arabic, and more of a universal one, since in any language society a person’s education (or lack of it) will undoubtedly play a part in the way they speak. In writing the case is similar where literacy is a given, however the level of education a person has will undoubtedly affect their writing style, as is true of any language. The question for researchers now is how to define the way language is used in reality, rather than ideologically. The same questions must be applied to writing, since studies have shown that the mixed style has existed at least since the middle ages, and it is a deliberate style used by the writers, not the result of mistakes as was previously thought. This is certainly reflected in the Facebook posts presented in this study, which are written in a mixed style by highly literate speakers. So the main questions driving this study are: given the diglossic situation of Arabic, how have writers adapted to and in some cases exploited, the language situation? Which -3 ! strategies do they use and which conscious decisions have been made regarding their use of the language? In the age of the nahḍah, when Arabic writing proliferated in response to the threat of the widespread use of English, writers employed a colloquial or intermediate form of written Arabic in order to bring the language to a level that ordinary people could comprehend. With the rise of modern drama and fiction, writers faced an internal struggle with the language situation and resolved to use another form of mixed or intermediate Arabic. And as authoritarian rule took hold and with it widespread censorship and control of the press and print publishing, control of the language was also imposed, with a rigid editing process and use of correctors (Haeri, 2003). Now, in the age of the internet, we are witnessing a democratisation of the language with writers feeling more freedom to use whatever type of language they choose. This study looks at non-Standard Arabic, or ‘āmmīyah writing both online and in print, looking specifically at Egyptian, or rather Cairene, ‘āmmīyah. In searching for literary precedents for ‘āmmīyah writing, two examples were immediately identified: the use of ‘āmmīyah in national newspapers during the nahḍah, or Arab enlightenment at the beginning of the twentieth century, and the use of ‘āmmīyah in the Arabic novel, a new form of literature that took hold and gained widespread popularity in the midtwentieth century. In fact, “the occurrence of a new function (the novel) in modern Arabic literature resulted in considerable tension between [Standard Arabic, fuṣḥá] and [‘āmmīyah]. It is in response to that tension that a new linguistic style […] has appeared in Arabic literature” (AbdelMalek, 1972: 141). These two examples occur at times of significant political upheaval in Egypt: the age of the nahḍa with its associated struggle against imperialism, and the modern age with its overthrow of the Egyptian monarchy and establishment of a republic. These examples and their associated political climates can be compared to the rise of ‘āmmīyah writing online and the political events and upheaval surrounding the events of 2011. So it is against this backdrop that this study is presented in two parts: Part I presents a review of existing theoretical frameworks of Arabic, and a proposed theoretical framework for Arabic writing; while Part II presents -4 ! an application of the proposed framework on an online case study of an influential Facebook page at the time of the 2011 protests in Egypt, the 6th April Youth Movement Facebook page, as well as a review of other studies of online and print examples of ‘mixed’ Arabic writing. The term fuṣḥá is used to refer to the Modern Standard and Classical varieties of Arabic traditionally used in writing, while the term ‘āmmīyah is used to refer to the spoken variety, or varieties, known as ‘colloquial’ Arabic, and more specifically the Cairene dialect of Egypt, on which this study is focused. To begin with, a literature review is presented in Chapter 2 covering three main areas related to this study: Arabic sociolinguistics, internet linguistics, and social media and the Arab Spring. In the field of Arabic sociolinguistics, a review of the major studies to date is presented: Ferguson’s diglossia (1959), Badawi’s Arabic language levels (1973), Educated Spoken Arabic (equivalent to the third of Badawi’s (ibid.) five Arabic language levels) and Rickford’s continuum theory as applied to Arabic by Hary (1996). I compare these with the findings of this study, and find that interestingly, the results of the continuum studies stem from native speakers’ perceptions of only single words or single sentences, in some cases contradicting the findings of other studies of longer texts. This point is relevant because in this study, the argument for contextualisation when analysing written texts (of single words within a sentence as well as the wider text as a whole) leads to a very different conclusion about language use to other studies whose analysis is based on single-word distinctions. These findings are discussed more fully in Chapter 6. Finally in the literature review I present an overview of studies of ‘āmmīyah in writing, including: • Middle Arabic (Bellem & Smith, 2014), a mixed literary style of writing predominant in the Middle Ages and found in texts up until the midnineteenth century • Zajal poetry and early print newspapers from the late nineteenth to early twentieth century, such as Abū Naḍḍārah Zarqā by Ya‘qūb Ṣannū‘ and al-Ustādh by ‘Abdallah al-Nadīm, with a comparison between the use of -5 ! āmmiyyah in these early nationalist papers and its use in online youth political activism today, made later in the same chapter • Modern drama and fiction, which redefined modern Arabic writing and left a lasting legacy in the Arabic literary canon by such prominent writers as Tawfiq al-Hakim, Yusuf Idris and Yusuf Sibai, whose innovative writing styles are explored in more detail in Chapter 3. The role of gender in the use of ‘āmmīyah is also explored in this section, referring to both the influence of gender on the use of ‘āmmīyah, as well as the use of ‘āmmīyah as an expression of female characters by male writers. The section on internet linguistics includes Crystal’s (2006) work on English internet linguistics and his definition of Netspeak, as well as studies of Arabic use online such as Aboelezz (2008) and the larger Spot On Public Relations (2010) study of social media use in the Arab World. Crucially, these studies of Arabic use online include non-Arabic language and script use by Arab users, whereas this study focuses on Arabic language in Arabic script only. Finally, the section on social media and the Arab Spring looks at online youth political activism and the role of social media in the Arab Spring and traces the build up of activism for a decade prior to the events of 2011. The activism of Wael Ghonim and the Facebook page We are all Khaled Said (Ghonim, 2012) is compared with that of the 6th April Youth Movement and their Facebook page, particularly their choice of language and close collaboration. A further comparison is made between the online youth political activism of the early twenty first century, and that of the nationalist activists and the early print press in Egypt in the early twentieth century, a century apart but showing striking similarities in their use of ‘āmmīyah to reach and strike a chord with their readers. Part I is made up of two chapters: Chapter 3 is a review of existing theoretical frameworks for Arabic writing and Chapter 4 presents a new theoretical framework for written Arabic. Chapter 3 identifies three distinct writing styles of modern Arabic literary writers: fuṣḥá, āmmīyah and an intermediate level, with the salient feature of being neither wholly fuṣḥá nor wholly ‘āmmīyah. Chapter 3 also presents a review of the literature on code-switching and mixing in speaking and writing, and translanguaging. -6 ! It explores in detail the concept of Intermediate Arabic and its application by three prominent writers: Tawfiq al-Hakim, Yusuf Sibai and Yusuf Idris, comparing and contrasting its definitions, usage and evolution between these writers. Next, it explores the concept of strategic bivalency (Mejdell, 2004) an overall style that is written in such a way that it can be read equally as either fuṣḥá or ‘āmmīyah, or both. The term fuṣḥāmmīyah (Rosenbaum, 2000) is also explored and finally, precedents for ‘āmmīyah writing are presented, including the examples in Doss & Davies (2013). Chapter 4 presents the proposed theoretical framework for Arabic writing as a set of ‘styles’ of Arabic writing based on the observations in Chapter 3, and assuming the Arabic language to be one, unified language with variations in style between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah. The framework assumes the basis and majority of the two forms to be similar or the same, with a defined group of differences of varying degrees. Details of each category and subcategory are given, with examples of each. Part II presents an application of the proposed theoretical framework on examples of contemporary language use, both online and in print. Chapter 5 is a case study of the 6th April Youth Movement Facebook page. The study’s methodology and findings are given, including the categorisation of the selected posts for analysis into clear groups that correspond to their respective language use. An analysis of examples in each category follows, with an assignment of a writing style to each, between MSA, IA and CWA. Chapter 6 is a comparative review of three mixed-style studies: Ramsay (2012), which examines language use in online blogs; Kosoff (2014), which analyses tweets from ten prominent Arabic Twitter users; and Håland (2017), which looks at code-switching in satirical writing. Ramsay’s findings about language use of online bloggers are found to correspond to the findings of the case study, Kosoff’s analysis of online tweets is reexamined in light of the proposed theoretical framework, and Håland’s findings are compared to the findings of this study and the proposed theoretical framework. -7 ! - Chapter 2 Literature Review This study is concerned primarily with the practical use of Arabic and takes a descriptive, rather than prescriptive view. As such, Arabic sociolinguistics is identified as a main relevant area of study and has been included in the literature review presented in this chapter. Secondly, the online content included in this study leads us to the field of internet linguistics, which has been instrumental in breaking down the language of the internet into defined areas of study. Finally, the role of social media and the Arab Spring as catalysts for the use of āmmīyah in online writing is another major area of study and as such is included in this literature review. So the literature review for this study covers the three relevant areas to the topic of this study: 1. Arabic sociolinguistics 2. Internet linguistics 3. Social media and the Arab Spring 2.1 Arabic sociolinguistics In order to understand the current state and usage of the Arabic language, it is important to understand the framework of linguistic and sociolinguistic studies relevant to it. In the case of the Arabic language, two main challenges appear on the linguistic and sociolinguistic scene, namely that it is a diglossic language spoken in more than twenty countries, each with their own regional and local varieties; and the prestige of the ‘High’ varieties, namely Classical Arabic and more recently Modern Standard Arabic (MSA), which are the standard, formally-taught forms of Arabic. Badawi (2006) highlights the fact that whereas the “Qur’anic” variety of Arabic was previously the model for standard (spoken) Arabic, the language of the media is becoming the model for present-day educated and non-educated native Arabic speakers. Badawi has identified the media as a contemporary language model for MSA, so it follows that the language of Arabic media and its influence should be explored. It is worth noting that despite the fact that traditional news media does use MSA, the -8 ! language of the news varies from one region to another (Parkinson, 2010), and that Egyptian mass entertainment media uses colloquial Egyptian Arabic. A further challenge is the lack of discourse analysis of Arabic, and the relative paucity of linguistic and sociolinguistic studies of contemporary Arabic language use. Although some work in the field of Arabic sociolinguistics has been carried out and is discussed below, Ryding (2006) and Badawi (2006) both confirm the lack and subsequent need for more discourse analysis. In El-Said Badawi’s Foreword to the landmark book Handbook for Arabic Language Teaching Professionals in the 21st Century, he remarks that: Modern learners face the unenviable task of trying to learn an ill-defined, illresearched, socially diffused phenomenon whose properties and functions are badly and disparately understood by non-native and native speakers alike. The lack of clearly defined language objectives that the teaching profession is suffering from today is a function of the lack of a clear understanding (or at least appreciation) of the sociolinguistic role it plays in present-day Arab societies. (Badawi, 2006: ix) Versteegh (1997) echoes this point and believes that the dialects have struggled to gain recognition as a “serious object of study” in the Arab world. He attributes this to the political significance of MSA as the unifying language of the Arabs and by contrast the interest of British orientalists in the various dialects, which came to be “symbols of the fragmentation of the Arab world” (Versteegh, 1997: 132). In fact, the first orientalist to push for teaching colloquial Arabic in schools and even to write Arabic in Latin script was Daniel Fiske in the late nineteenth century (Zack, 2014). Since then attempts to codify or push for writing in the colloquial language, particularly by non-native speakers of Arabic, have been met with suspicion (for example see the study of Saīd, 1964). More recently however, Arabic dialectology has emerged as a field of study and emerging studies are paving the way for further research, including Al-Wer & Jong (2009) and Miller (2007). -9 ! Despite this lack of understanding of Arabic sociolinguistics, the studies and research discussed below have gone some way to describing the contemporary language situation. What these studies have established, however, is that MSA is the accepted form of writing despite its being a relatively unfamiliar variety of Arabic to native speakers, who learn their local dialect as their ‘mother tongue’ from the earliest age at home, and use it in most everyday situations albeit for spoken communication only. In addition to spoken Arabic, colloquial Arabic writing is similarly underresearched (if not more so). Despite the predominance of MSA as the language of writing, publications in colloquial Arabic do exist and recent fields of study have emerged to focus on these, and are explored in further detail below. 2.1.1 Diglossia A term first introduced by William Marçais (1930), it gained further prominence after Charles Ferguson published his landmark article Diglossia to describe the situation in which “Two varieties of a language exist side by side throughout the community, with each having a definite role to play” (Ferguson, 1959: 325). Ferguson defines diglossia as: ... a relatively stable language situation in which, in addition to the primary dialects of the language (which may include a standard or regional standards), there is a very divergent, highly codified (often grammatically more complex) super-imposed variety, the vehicle of a large and respected body of written literature, either in an earlier period or in another speech community, which is learned largely by formal education and is used for most written and formal spoken purposes but is not used by any sector of the community for ordinary conversation. (Ferguson, 1959: 336) Ferguson describes the ‘super-imposed’ variety as the High (H) variety and the dialects as the Low (L) variety. Equating Ferguson’s ‘H’ variety with MSA as the written, formal variety, and his ‘L’ with Egyptian Arabic, we see that MSA enjoys a higher status but that it is also the less familiar variety since it is learned formally and not acquired naturally like Egyptian Arabic. - ! 10 However, in describing the features of diglossia, Ferguson identifies a third variety that falls in between the H and L varieties. He describes this as: ...a kind of spoken Arabic much used in certain semiformal or cross-dialectal situations has a highly classical vocabulary with few or no inflectional endings, with certain features of classical syntax but with a fundamentally colloquial base in morphology and syntax, and a generous admixture of colloquial vocabulary. (Ferguson, 1959: 332) So although diglossia views the language as having two varieties, each with its own distinct features and uses, we see that this view is rather simplistic and that even a diglossic language has multiple levels and layers with overlapping features and even uses. This is perhaps the first identification of what has come to be known as Educated Spoken Arabic (ESA), which is explored further in the next section. In terms of online political writing, perhaps ESA is the best way of describing the type of language used, since it is not strictly MSA, nor is it purely dialectal, as we will see below. One of the effects of labelling Arabic as diglossic, is that studies of Arabic have tended to observe written and spoken Arabic separately, often assuming written Arabic to be constant and unchanging. 2.1.2 Arabic Language Levels Badawi's (1973: 89) landmark study describes the contemporary Arabic language situation in Egypt and identifies five language levels: 1. fuṣḥá al-turāth (Classical Arabic) 2. fuṣḥá al-‘aṣr (Modern Standard Arabic) 3. ‘āmmīyat al-muthaqqafīn (‘high’ Educated Spoken Arabic) 4. ‘āmmīyat al-mutanawwirīn (‘low’ Educated Spoken Arabic) 5. ‘āmmīyat al-’ummīyyīn (illiterate spoken Arabic) A comparison can be drawn between Badwi’s levels and Ferguson’s. In fact, Holes (1995) views Badawi’s levels as an expansion of Ferguson’s High (H) and Low (L) levels: - 11 ! Levels 1 and 2 [of Badawi’s model] correspond to Ferguson’s ‘H’, Levels 4 and 5 to his ‘L’, with Level 3 representing a bridge between them, and equating to his ‘semi-formal’ level. Badawi’s terminology points to a fault-line in the continuum between Levels 2 and 3: whereas Level 2 is is still fuṣḥá:, Level 3 is ‘āmmīyah. His explanation is that while Level 2 may show dialectal phonological influences, its morphosyntactic base remains grammar-book fuṣḥá:. Level 3, on the other hand, whilst it may show quite heavy use of fuṣḥá: vocabulary and phraseology and concomitant phonological and morphological influences, its syntactic systems – in particular word order, expression of mood and aspect, systems of negation and concord – remain non-standard. (Holes, 1995: 281) As for the variances between each level, Badawi (ibid.: 97-119) finds that use of fuṣḥá characteristics is highest at level 1 and decreases as we move down the scale towards level 5, while conversely ‘āmmīyah characteristics are highest at level 5 and decrease as we move up the scale to level 1, as shown in Figure 2.1 below, based on Badawi’s figures 3-4 (p. 104). Figure 2.1 Distribution of fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah characteristics between Badawi’s levels. Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 Fuṣḥá characteristics Loanwords ‘āmmīyah characteristics - ! 12 - Interestingly, as can be seen from the figure, Badawi does not define level 1 as pure fuṣḥá i.e. without any ‘āmmīyah characteristics, and vice versa, since he claims one can determine a native Arabic speaker’s country of origin through their pronunciation, even when speaking in pure fuṣḥá, or level 1, and in even in writing, where regional influences are found in the choice of some lexis. This shows that some ‘āmmīyah influence can be found even at the highest level of fuṣḥá, and that ‘pure’ fuṣḥá has become an ideal, rather than reality. This is significant, as although Badawi is primarily describing the spoken form of the language, this type of influence (‘āmmīyah in fuṣḥá and vice versa) can also be observed in written language, as will be seen in Chapter 3 below. Examples of some of the characteristics of each language type are given by Badawi as follows: * Phonological: the fuṣḥá pronunciation of q, is found in level 1, decreasing as we go down to level 3 and disappearing altogether by level 5 (with the exception of one word: al-qur’ān); conversely the ‘āmmīyah pronunciation of q as hamzah is found in level 5, increasing as we go up the scale to level 3 (it is hardly ever found in level 2, and not found at all in level 1). * Syntactic: generally speaking the V-S order preference is found in level 1, while the S-V order preference is found in levels 4-5. More or less equal preference is found in level 2; and in level 3 there is a S-V preference with the exception of the passive voice, which tends to prefer V-S order. * Borrowing: use of foreign words is found unreservedly in level 3, followed by level 2 (mainly for scientific and technological terms that have no fuṣḥá equivalent); level 1 has some historical loanwords (opposed to new or modern ones); and some foreign words are found in level 4 (mainly names of household items, clothes and beauty products); while very few are found in level 5 (restricted mainly to words that have been absorbed into ‘āmmīyah through wider society, such as ‫( ﻣــــﺎﺗــــش‬mātsh, ‘match’), ‫( ﺟراج‬garāj, ‘garage’) and ‫( ﺗﻠﯾﻔون‬tilīfūn, ‘telephone’). In these levels and the description of their characteristics we see a development in Arabic sociolinguistics from a simplistic diglossic model - ! 13 with two language levels, H and L, towards a more sophisticated model that attempts to explain the multiple and at times overlapping layers of the Arabic language. This view of the language, with its interactions and overlaps, mirrors that of this study of written Arabic. It has also raised another area identified for further study, which is that of the different types of continua, since it is possible to have continua where there is clustering of occurrences around particular points or in particular areas. Apparently, this is something which occurs in prosody but is outside the scope of this study. Criticisms of Badawi‘s model have been made, such as Versteegh's (2014) claim that “the association with socio-economic groups that Badawī proposes is doubtful. There is not much empirical research on the social distribution of speech levels in Egypt, or for that matter in any Arab country” (ibid; 244). Also Elgibali (1985), who showed that “only the upper and lower level (Ferguson‘s H and L, Badawī's level V and I) could be called discrete levels with a characteristic set of features. The middle part of the continuum cannot be divided into separate levels” (Versteegh, 2014; 244). This shows that like Ferguson's (1959) diglossic model, Badawi's (1973) model provided a platform from which further sociolinguistic study could emerge and build on them, in the absence of a theoretical framework for contemporary Arabic use. 2.1.3 Educated Spoken Arabic (ESA) Out of the five levels identified by Badawi (1973) above, it is the middle level 3 (ESA) that has been the subject of many further studies that aim to identify its salient features. The identification of ESA has been a significant development in the field of Arabic linguistics and sociolinguistics, as the form of language used by educated native Arabic speakers. Al-Husari (1985: 283) describes ESA as a spoken language that has developed in ‘educated environments’ in all Arab countries that has acquired many of the characteristics of Standard Arabic (fuṣḥá) while avoiding many of those of colloquial Arabic (‘āmmīyah). Conversely, Wilmsen (2006: 130) describes ESA as essentially ‘āmmīyah with some of the more formal and technical lexicon borrowed from fuṣḥá. Wilmsen’s view seems to echo that of Ferguson and Holes, mentioned above. Mazraani (1997) believes ESA is the result of the spread of literacy: - ! 14 - The spread of literacy saw the emergence of a new elite that felt unhappy about MSA as an expressive tool, inadequate for many aspects of modern life, while the dialect, suitable for mundane needs, was deemed equally inadequate. ... The urge to develop a modern spoken idiom which could be understood at all levels of the population resulted in the emergence of Educated Spoken Arabic, which has been given different names by different observers. ESA was, moreover, officialized and legitimized in the fifties and sixties through the speeches of politicians such as Gamal Abdul Nasser” (Mazraani, 1997: 12). Mazraani refers to Nasser as the first known Arab politician to take advantage of the language situation in Egypt. Prior to Nasser, political speeches were delivered in fuṣḥá. However, Nasser often mixed ‘āmmīyah with fuṣḥá in his speeches for oratorical effect. The result was a highly effective rhetoric that resonated well with ordinary Egyptians. Since then, other Arab leaders such as the former Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi and the former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein, followed suit and it has become not only acceptable but also desirable for Arab politicians to use local dialects for rhetorical effect in their political speeches. Nasser’s use of ESA has particular resonance when viewed alongside the young political activists of today, and their use of ‘āmmīyah in their online writing. At different points in time, both have paved the way for using colloquial Arabic for political effect - Nasser in speeches and the activists in writing. In terms of use and function, it is widely accepted that ESA is used in formal contexts such as academia and political speeches. In fact, Holes (1995: 283) describes the language employed by Nasser, known for the strength of his rhetoric, as switching between Levels 2 and 3 of Badawi’s model; using mainly Level 3 (ESA) with a heavily Cairene dialect for rhetorical effect. Holes believes that Nasser was the first to “go against the grain of the traditions of formal public speaking which had lasted until as late as the mid 1950s”. In fact, Holes states that since Nasser, both Muammar Gaddafi and Saddam Hussein frequently used ESA to deliver their speeches, further highlighting that it was Nasser who “broke this oratorical mould”. - ! 15 ESA is also used by educated Arabic speakers in informal contexts. Although many of the studies of ESA have focused on its use in Egypt and particularly in Cairo, such as Schmidt (1974), Schulz (1981), Mitchell (1986, 1990), Mitchell and El-Hassan (1994), Haeri (1996) and Badawi (1973); Holes (1995) and Abdel-Jawad (1981) confirm that ESA is also used in Bahrain and Jordan respectively. Holes states that: in a conversation between a group of educated Bahraini acquaintances, the dialectal base will be Bahraini ... it is unlikely that any group of Bahrainis talking relaxedly among themselves, or indeed any group from any other single speech community, would deviate markedly from the local linguistic common denominator, that is, the dialectal features which they all share. This means that the phonology, morphology and sentence syntax would be dialectal virtually whatever they were talking about; choice of vocabulary however, which depends much more directly on topic, would be more variable ... We are, in other words, talking about a Bahraini incarnation of Badawi’s Level 3 ‘the colloquial of the educated’ [ESA]. (Holes, 1995: 287-8) Holes’ view supports the notion that ESA is essentially ‘āmmīyah with some fuṣḥá lexicon and that this is true across different Arabic speaking countries, not just in Egypt. This observation has been made in this study below with regards to some forms of the written language that appear to have the structure and lexicon of ESA. 2.1.4 Arabic language continuum/multiglossia The concept of the language continuum was developed with reference to creole and pidgin languages by Rickford (1987). However, Hary (1996) found that the concept could be applied to Arabic, and conducted a small study to observe patterns of perception of Arabic speakers with regards to intermediate forms and their hypothetical place on the continuum. Interestingly, to investigate a continuum, it is probably necessary to break it up into separate categories, imposing an ‘arbitrary but appropriate’ division (Hjelmslev 1953: 24-25). Although the continuum concept, like diglossia and Badawi’s levels discussed above, is primarily concerned with the spoken form of the language, ‘āmmīyah, it is nonetheless worth noting some of the main - ! 16 findings regarding the intermediate form of Arabic, since it is speakers’ exposure to the spoken form (with all its attributes, from formal fuṣḥá to informal ‘āmmīyah), that have undoubtedly influenced their language choices in writing, which is the focus of this study. Generally speaking, studies of variation in spoken Arabic tend to focus on variation between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah words (such as ‫ رأى‬ra’ā, ‘ to see’, used in fuṣḥá and ‫ ﺷــــﺎف‬shāf, ‘to see’, used in ‘āmmīyah), as well as intermediate forms, including theoretical hybrids, such as the fuṣḥá verb ‫‘( رأﯾـــﺗﮫ‬I saw him’) pronounced ra’e:tuh with a ‘āmmīyah-style diphthong, or the ‘āmmīyah verb ‫‘( ﺷــــﻔـﺗـﮫ‬I saw him’) pronounced shuftuhu with the fuṣḥástyle vocalisation. In writing however, these finer points of pronunciation are less immediately obvious, rendering much of the shared vocabulary between the Standard and non-Standard/colloquial forms in intermediate or mixed-style writing as ambiguous, or open to interpretation. Hary’s (ibid.: 83) relevant findings of the intermediate variety which exists theoretically on the continuum between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah extremes either side, are as follows: * Fuṣḥá markers are not compatible with ‘āmmīyah elements, or with elements that are perceived as ‘āmmīyah - this is relevant to this study as the main argument for contextualising shared forms in mixed-style writing, where an identifiable fuṣḥá word or marker renders that section of text as fuṣḥá, and vice versa. * Some fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah markers can go unnoticed by native speakers this is significant as although it relates to the pronunciation of orthographically identical words, it shows that native speakers’ perceptions do not always match the expectation or ‘rules’ of fuṣḥá/‘āmmīyah forms, which could help to explain some of the mixedstyle writing we see today. * The results stem from native speakers’ perceptions of single words or single sentences, in some cases contradicting the findings of other studies of longer texts. This is relevant because in this study, the argument for contextualisation when analysing written texts (of single words within a sentence as well as the text as a whole) leads to a very - ! 17 different conclusion about language use to other studies whose analysis is based on single-word distinctions, as will be seen in Chapter 6 below. 2.1.5 ‘āmmīyah in writing Traditionally, studies of written Arabic have tended to assume that the language of writing is fuṣḥá (Modern Standard, if not Classical, Arabic). Some notable exceptions have been found in modern poetry and prose literature, but studies of these are limited and even where writers themselves have made an explicit case for their using ‘āmmīyah in their writing, very little systematic linguistic or sociolinguistic analysis has been applied to their works. On the contrary, writing in anything other than the accepted form of Standard Arabic has at times been met with derision. However, recent studies have emerged looking at what has been described as ‘Middle’ or ‘Mixed’ Arabic (Bellem & Smith, 2014; and Mejdell, 2014). These studies cover works from the Middle Ages until the present day, showing that mixing ‘āmmīyah and fuṣḥá Arabic in writing existed long before the advent of the internet or even modern drama and literature. Additionally, a recent publication by Doss & Davies (2013) has documented various forms of (Egyptian) ‘āmmīyah writing, from 1401 to 2009. Again this shows that writing in ‘āmmīyah has a long, albeit less well-known history. It is clear to anyone reading in Arabic today that writing in ‘āmmīyah, or using some form of ‘mixed’ Arabic has become widespread, whether online or in print. Documenting these forms of writing has become imperative, as has the need to look more closely at the writing styles and strategies used by writers, contemporary and historical, in order to gain a better, more accurate and vital understanding of this complex aspect of Arabic writing. What follows is an outline of some of the historical examples of ‘āmmīyah writing that have been found, in an attempt to start to trace the history, trends and development of ‘āmmīyah writing. 2.1.5.1 Middle Arabic Middle Arabic generally refers to a style of writing that is both linguistically and historically in the ‘middle’: linguistically it is essentially fuṣḥá (Classical Arabic), with some ‘āmmīyah features, as well as the more - ! 18 intriguing features that belong neither to fuṣḥá nor ‘āmmīyah (Bellem & Smith, 2014); while the texts that have been identified as written in this style generally date to the Middle Ages. However, Bellem & Smith (ibid.) reject the term ‘Middle Arabic’ and prefer ‘Literary Mixed Arabic’ (LMA). Despite this rejection, it is not clear that this style appears outside of this historical period, or beyond the mid-nineteenth century. Therefore the adoption of the term ‘literary’, implying lack of temporal restriction, may not be accurate, since a distinctive feature of Middle Arabic is the third category of features that fall neither within Classical/Standard Arabic, nor Spoken Arabic, which does not seem to have been identified in modern Arabic literature. The ‘mixed’ style of Arabic found in modern texts contains elements from both Standard and Spoken Arabic (and many shared elements between them) and are identifiable as such, but do not seem to contain elements that are neither fuṣḥá nor ‘āmmīyah. Further, modern mixed writing, as will be discussed further in Chapter 3 below, follows different stylistic patterns, such as distinctly fuṣḥá narrative and ‘āmmīyah dialogue in some cases, or other forms of inter-sentential codeswitching in others. The distinct feature of LMA, i.e. its use of forms that are neither Standard nor Spoken, but an intra-sentential mix of the two, is as yet not fully understood - these forms were initially seen to be grammatical mistakes, but are currently being reanalysed as a deliberate stylistic choice, the patterns and origins of which are only beginning to be explored. This can be said of modern mixed Arabic texts, which although composed of mixed language, do not appear to involve mixing as a result of mistakes made in writing, and in which the mixing does not appear to be random but follows clear inter-sentential patterns of and motivations for switching as shown in this study. Another feature of LMA is that fuṣḥá seems to dominate the style, with many ‘āmmīyah features mixed into the fuṣḥá base. This is not always the case for modern mixed Arabic, where the base can be fuṣḥá with clear, typographically marked instances of borrowing of a single foreign or ‘āmmīyah lexical item or inter-sentential code-switching to ‘āmmīyah, such as direct speech quotes or dialogue and some newspaper headlines; or the text base can be seen to be predominantly ‘āmmīyah with an initial code-switch from fuṣḥá. Lastly, it - ! 19 would appear that Judeo-Christian MA texts may have a greater proportion of ‘āmmīyah-type features (ibid.). Although a comparison between modern-day mixed texts by Christian and Muslim authors is beyond the scope of this study, most of the examples and the case study presented in the following chapters are written by Muslim writers, which indicates that modern-day mixing has been adopted as a general feature of writing, regardless of the writer’s religious identity. 2.1.5.2 Zajal poetry and early print media The earliest examples of ‘āmmīyah writing as a genre are found in zajal poetry, which started to appear in nationalist newspapers in the late 19th century. The appearance of zajal poetry in newspapers is closely tied with the Egyptian nationalist movement and the nationalist newspapers soon started to adopt ‘āmmīyah writing for some of their articles, in order to reach the uneducated masses who were illiterate and relied on public readings of these newspapers. The first of these papers were Abū Naḍḍārah Zarqā by Ya‘qūb Ṣannū‘ and al-Ustādh by ‘Abdallah al-Nadīm. A comparison of the use of ‘āmmīyah in these nationalist papers and in online youth political activism is made in this chapter below. 2.1.5.3 Modern drama and fiction The use of ‘āmmīyah in poetry and print media paved the way for later writers in the mid-twentieth century to use elements of ‘āmmīyah in their plays, novels and short stories, such as the leading Egyptian writers Muhammad Ḥusayn Haykal, Tawfiq al-Hakim and Yusuf Idris, and the Sudanese writer Tayeb Salih (Dickins, 2002: 84 and Holes, 1995: 304-9). The language use of some of these writers is discussed further in Chapter 3 below. Now with the advent of the internet, there has been a notable rise in the use of ‘āmmīyah in writing for various purposes, which this study aims to investigate. 2.1.5.4 The role of gender in ‘āmmiyyah writing In at least two works referred to as part of this study, there have been references made to the need for writing in ‘āmmīyah either to express the way a female character would speak or to target a readership of women. It seems that the historic lack of education available to women played a - ! 20 part in motivating (predominantly male) writers to write in ‘āmmīyah. Examples of this include: * ‘Abdallah al-Nadīm (1843/44-1896): al-Nadīm published articles written in ‘āmmīyah in his magazine, al-Ustādh, which he justified as needed for the ‘refinement’ of women and children (Doss & Davies, 2013: 75). * Farah Anton (1874-1922): in his play Miṣr al-Jadīdah Anton writes that he has used a ‘middle language’ for the female characters specifically, described as ‘neither fuṣḥá nor ‘āmmīyah’, but a ‘simplified fuṣḥá or enlightened ‘āmmīyah’ (Badawi, 1973: 70). Bassiouney (2013) found that studies of linguistic variation in relation to gender in the Arab world show “that women sometimes do not have access to education and professional life to the same extent as men do and thus their use of [fuṣḥá] is less than that of men” (p. 161). Further, “when women have a choice between the prestigious urban variety, a rural variety and [fuṣḥá], they are more prone to choose the urban variety” (ibid.). This seems to support the view held by the writers above that women are less likely to speak in fuṣḥá, or even understand it, perhaps due to lack of mastery caused by lower access to education. However, in two studies of cross-dialectal conversations between highly educated (degree-level or higher and proficient in a second language, English) native Arabic speakers, gender was again found to influence linguistic choice, with male participants borrowing more from fuṣḥá than their female counterparts, despite their high levels of education (AbuMelhim, 1992; and Soliman, 2014). The sociolinguistic studies mentioned above are part of an established body of literature that deals with Arabic language use in its spoken and written forms, and there are many aspects of these that can be applied to online writing with regards to the use of fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah forms, and the ways in which mixing occurs between the two. However, since these studies do not deal directly with online writing, it is worth taking a look at the general literature about internet linguistics, as presented in the next section below. - ! 21 - 2.2 Internet linguistics David Crystal (2006) coined the term ‘internet linguistics’ to describe the vast new medium for language use that is the internet. Since the internet is the same medium used all over the world regardless of the language used, Crystal’s observations about language use online in English, can be a good starting point for observing internet linguistics in Arabic, especially since there do not appear to have been any major studies of Arabic internet linguistics. With regards to studies of Arabic use on the internet, these seem mainly concerned with the use of Latin script to write in Arabic online, a practice that arose from the technological limitations of writing in Arabic. More recently writing in Arabic script has become much more widespread due to technological advances in both hardware and software, and studies into Arabic language use online have started to appear that focus on, or include, writing in Arabic script. These studies are mainly small-scale and focus on one particular aspect of language use, or on one particular platform with a limited number of users. New Arabic online corpora have helped researchers start to analyse the vast amounts of Arabic language data online, such as the arTenTen Corpus of the Arabic Web2. 2.2.1 English Internet linguistics Crystal (2006) recognises there are a number of misconceptions surrounding the use of language online and the effect writing online is having on language in general. As a linguist, he sets out to take an objective look at the language of the internet and demythologise some of the unfounded and yet widespread concerns about the internet and the English language. The same can be said for any language that is used online and certainly the same misconceptions about the corruption of language have been argued about the Arabic language. Before the Egyptian revolution of 2011, the internet and particularly social networking were not taken seriously by the authorities – partly at least due to the 2 Available from https://www.sketchengine.co.uk/artenten-arabic-corpus/ [Accessed 30 January 2018] - ! 22 informal nature of online communication as well as the informal language used. Crystal further points to a number of research challenges that any internet linguistics study will encounter, including the sheer amount of data available on the internet, which “contains more written language than all the libraries in the world combined” (2006, p.10) and continues to expand daily. There is also the diversity of the language encountered on the internet and the stylistic range: from webpages and email to social networking, which makes it difficult to generalise. Additionally, there is the speed of change with new technologies and communicative opportunities being created every day, which creates with it new forms of language and new data to be analysed. There is also the very specific dating of webpages, making it easy to be too specific with data collection between certain dates or even times, anonymity and the difficulty of collecting personal emails for example for analysis. This leads to ethical considerations such as what is considered public and what is private information? All of these considerations have been made for the purposes of this study and they are discussed further in Part II below. With regards to the question of whether Netspeak is in fact closer to written or spoken language, Crystal considers the internet as a new electronic or digital medium of language, which he lists as a fourth medium after speech, writing and signing. He concludes that while it has differences and similarities with both writing and speech, it is a new medium in itself, worthy of research. A similar argument could be made for Arabic as for English (or any other language): that the variety of language used online has similarities and differences to the spoken and written forms of the language (‘āmmīyah and fuṣḥá), and that it is worthy of study and research as a separate form of the language. Crystal approaches the language of the internet by breaking it up and exploring language use in its various domains, and builds his chapters around the language of each domain, such as the language of email, the language of chatrooms, etc. This does not appear to have been attempted previously for Arabic, and has been identified as an area for further research. - ! 23 - 2.2.2 Arabic Internet linguistics (studies of Arabic language use online) Due in part to the availability (or lack) of Arabic language software until relatively recently, studies of online activity and language use in the Arab world seem to focus on the use of ‘Latinised’ or Roman script Arabic as opposed to writing in Arabic script, as well as the mixing of other languages such as English and French, with Arabic. Latinised or Roman script Arabic is when users type what they want to say in Arabic using Latin or Roman characters and is popular on the internet, especially when Arabic language software or hardware is unavailable. These studies have found that when using Latinised or Roman script Arabic, users prefer to use the spoken form of Arabic (‘āmmīyah) over the traditional written form of fuṣḥá. One of those studies (Aboelezz, 2008: 4) states that: [diglossia] presents a complexity when dealing with LA [Latinised Arabic], as the Latinised form of Arabic is often the spoken form, which essentially reflects the regional variety that the user/speaker is accustomed to (Bianchi, 2006). This supports the idea that in their diglossic language situation, the form of choice for Arabic language internet users is the spoken form of Arabic, ‘āmmīyah, as opposed to the more formal standard form of fuṣḥá. This shows that although people are writing on the internet, they are not using the traditionally accepted form of writing; instead they are bringing the traditionally spoken form of the language into the written realm. There have also been ensuing print publications from original online pieces of writing, such as personal blogs, which show that this new form of written Arabic is spilling over from the virtual realm into the physical world of print. Although the idea of writing in colloquial Arabic is not new and several prominent authors have done this in the past, notably to write passages of dialogue in works of drama and fiction, it has not been usual for entire volumes of prose writing to be written and published in ‘āmmīyah. In fact, the status of fuṣḥá and its use for writing is so ingrained - ! 24 in the Arab world and the minds of native Arabic speakers that even Younes (2006), who developed an integrated Arabic language teaching programme that includes teaching both fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah at Cornell University in the US, states that: I believe that the main difference between Arabic and other languages resides in the unique status that the written version of the former enjoys for historical and religious reasons. It has not allowed, nor is it likely to allow at any time in the foreseeable future, the development of a writing system for any of the spoken dialects that closely reflects its structure. Any attempt at writing or codifying specific dialects is seen as a serious invasion of the territory of fuṣḥā, which is held in the utmost esteem by the overwhelming majority of Arabs. (Younes, 2006: 165). The younger generation of internet users seem to have bypassed this convention and organically developed a writing system for the spoken dialect, based apparently largely on existing ‘normal’ ways of writing ‘āmmīyah – e.g. what people have done for generations in writing postcards, etc. – and adopting these. And although they would likely claim the same esteem and regard for fuṣḥá, they do not (whether consciously or otherwise) tend to use it exclusively in writing online. Although the overwhelming majority of printed texts continue to be in fuṣḥá, we have seen that the popularity of online media is overtaking that of print media, and now that there have been publications originating online being published as physical books, the language of the online media is being adopted in print. If this trend continues, we will see an increase in the number of print publications that are not fuṣḥá, since it does not appear that a formal process of ‘translating’ online content into fuṣḥá for print is taking place in the same way as spoken Arabic is ‘translated’ into fuṣḥá in the state-controlled press. In that case, fuṣḥá may cease to be the only major form of written Arabic in the future, given the popularity of the internet in general, and the preference of young activists to discuss their views online rather than in print. If traditionally Arabic news media were the newspapers and official news broadcasts, they now include online - ! 25 blogs and news posted on social networks. In fact, a report published by the communications firm Spot On Public Relations claims that: ... there are more subscribers to social media service Facebook in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) than there are copies of newspapers circulated in the region. The report, ‘Middle East and Africa Facebook Demographics’, shows Facebook has over 15 million users in the region, while the total regional Arabic, English and French newspaper circulation stands at just under 14 million copies (Spot On Public Relations, 2010: 1). The use of ‘āmmīyah for writing online and also in print as we have seen above, is a phenomenon that undoubtedly will need further attention and research, and can be considered to be the next pertinent area of study in Arabic linguistics and sociolinguistics. The role of the internet in our lives, and particularly social media, for Arabic at least, can be traced back to the defining moment of the Arab Spring and so the relevant literature is explored next in the section below. 2.3 Social media and the Arab Spring - the role of online political activism The role of social media in facilitating the popular protests of 2011 cannot be overstated, particularly the Facebook pages of the youth political group 6th April Youth Movement, who first called for protests on 25 January 2011 and who were echoed in their calls by another popular Facebook page, We are all Khalid Said (Ghonim, 2012). The role of these young people, through the internet alone, and specifically through social networking websites, was to mobilise thousands to take to the streets in physical (as opposed to virtual) protest. In fact, a protest and opposition movement had been building up for a decade prior to 2011, with groups like Youth for Change, Tadamon, 6 April, We are all Khalid Said, and Baradei’s National Society for Change, which were able to use information and communication technology to create an alternative political space, and develop innovative tools of organisation and mobilisation, in addition to adopting a cross-ideological - ! 26 discourse, which allowed them to overcome the traditional weaknesses and divisions of the Egyptian opposition (Shehata, 2012). The close relationship between the 6th April Youth Movement and We are all Khalid Said is important to note, as well as the similarities and differences between the two groups. Both are youth movements, consisting mainly of youth leadership and membership. While both groups describe themselves as non-political, 6 April can be seen to be the brains of the operation since they organised the protests, while We Are All Khalid Said was the mouthpiece, simply relating to its followers the information as organised by 6 April (Ghonim, 2012). What is striking about both groups, and common amongst most internet pages, is the language used. The administrator of the We are all Khalid Said Facebook page, who at the time remained anonymous, explicitly chose to write in Egyptian ‘āmmīyah (Ghonim, 2012). The page has since been shut down, making it unfeasible if not impossible to view and analyse its content. In addition to its language use, this page made use of visual images that spread rapidly online, including an image of a smiling Khaled Said that started an important iconography of the revolution. Little is known about 6 April’s conscious decisions regarding language use and its content seems to be written by more than one person from the group. However, given the pertinent role of 6 April before, during and immediately after the protests of January 2011, the group’s Facebook page has been chosen as the object of this study. It is interesting to note the parallels between these Facebook pages and Abdallah al-Nadim’s magazine al-Ustādh, more than a century earlier. Firstly, their political activism: Abdallah al-Nadim was a prominent figure in the Egyptian nationalist movement and was arrested and exiled from Egypt in 1891-92 (Ramaḍān, 19943). Similarly, the writers of the Facebook pages, Wael Ghomin of We are all Khaled Said and a prominent founder of the 6th April Youth Movement, Ahmed Maher, have 3 In his introduction to Min Turāth ‘Abdallah al-Nadīm: Majallat al-Ustādh. [Online]. Published by Al-Hay’ah al-Miṣriyīyah al-‘āmmah lil-Kitāb, 1994, pp.3-4. [Accessed on 03 February 2018]. Available from: http://dar.bibalex.org/ webpages/mainpage.jsf?PID=DAF-Job:119250 - ! 27 been in self-imposed exile and imprisoned respectively, since the 2011 uprising. Secondly, their timing: both the Facebook pages and the magazine were set up at times of (and for the purposes of) political discord under authoritarian rule - the Facebook pages in the lead up to the 2011 protests against the Mubarak regime in Egypt, and the magazine at the time of the Egyptian nationalist movement and resistance against the British occupation of Egypt. Thirdly, their influence: Abdallah al-Nadim was an influential figure for the youth of his time4 and certainly the Facebook pages had a great influence in mobilising the youth to take to the streets in protest in 2011 (Ghonim, 2012). Fourthly, and most notably for this study, is the language: al-Nadim, 6th April Youth Movement and Wael Ghonim (the writer behind the We are all Khaled Said Facebook page), all used firstly Arabic, at a time when English seemed to be predominant over Arabic (in the case of al-Nadim his use of Arabic was a retaliation against British rule and the imposition of English as the language of education5, in the case of the Facebook users it came at a time when English dominated the internet); secondly they all used ‘āmmīyah in their writing in order to reach as wide an audience as possible, and influence, even mobilise, a non-political, non-activist mass; thirdly the use of ‘āmmīyah was not ideologically driven, nor intended to be to the detriment or as a replacement of fuṣḥá, but rather a pragmatic choice, in order simply to reach the widest audience possible, that would have been traditionally excluded from political discourse and activism - a form of consequentialism whereby the end justifies the means. Interestingly, the difference in the educational levels of the audiences shows how use of ‘āmmīyah and perceptions of it have changed over the last century - in the early print newspapers it was used as a way to reach the illiterate, uneducated masses since people would gather around a 4 ibid 5In ‘Abd al-Mun’im Ibrahīm al-Jumaymī’s Analytical Study (Dirāsah Taḥlīlīyah) in Min Turāth ‘Abdallah al-Nadīm: Majallat al-Ustādh. [Online]. Published by AlHay’ah al-Miṣriyīyah al-‘āmmah lil-Kitāb, 1994, pp.10-13. [Accessed on 03 February 2018]. Available from: http://dar.bibalex.org/webpages/mainpage.jsf? PID=DAF-Job:119250 - ! 28 ‘reader’ reading aloud from a newspaper to hear the news, while in the case of the online activists their audience is literate as well as computer literate, implying some degree (if not a high degree) of education. So the present day use of ‘āmmīyah is not intended as a ‘dumbing-down’ of the language, but rather a way to reach the hearts of people, just as Nasser did in his political speeches (Mazraani, 1997). After this exploration of the established literature in the relevant fields of Arabic sociolinguistics, internet linguistics and social media and the Arab Spring, the two main parts of the study are presented below. The first part presents the proposed theoretical framework of this study, followed by a practical application of the framework in the second part. - ! 29 - Part I Towards a theoretical framework - ! 30 - Chapter 3 Review of existing theoretical frameworks This chapter looks at existing theoretical frameworks and analytical studies of ‘mixed’ language use, including code-switching in speaking and writing, in English and Arabic, as well as the more recent concept of translanguaging. In the literature review above, the established sociolinguistic frameworks introduced by Ferguson (1959) and Badawi (1973) were presented as both pinnacles of Arabic sociolinguistics and launchpads for subsequent studies of Arabic language use, particularly ESA. Studies looking at the practical aspects of ESA such as codeswitching, are presented below, as well as the more recent sociolinguistic literature about translanguaging, which does not seem to have been applied to Arabic yet. Additionally, an initial investigation as part of this study has revealed something of a trend in descriptions of some of the most prominent writers of ‘āmmīyah, namely, that they tend to have three different writing styles identified throughout their writing careers. The three styles have either been used in succession across the writers’ careers, or deployed strategically within the same work to suit different purposes. Among this group of writers, Farah Anton, Tawfiq al-Hakim and Yusuf Sibai, as well as others including contemporary influential online bloggers, have variously been described as having three distinct writing styles: fuṣḥá (that is exclusive use of fuṣḥá with perhaps the exception of a few words or phrases that are usually highlighted between quotation marks or brackets), āmmīyah (either exclusively or alongside fuṣḥá, for example for the dialogue alongside the narrative in literary works), and something of an intermediate level that is either described as a simplified fuṣḥá, a mix of ‘āmmīyah and fuṣḥá, or something else, with the salient feature of being neither wholly fuṣḥá nor wholly ‘āmmīyah and therefore something in-between, often the result of a writer’s internal struggle with the language situation, between appeasing the writing establishment and writing in fuṣḥá and wanting to write more freely and naturally using ‘āmmīyah. In spoken Arabic, this style could be perhaps most closely associated with what has come to be known as ESA. Intermediate Arabic - ! 31 is looked at more closely in the last part of this chapter in order to begin to define what it is and how it is identified and achieved. 3.1 Code-switching and mixing Gumperz (1982) defines conversational code-switching as “the juxtaposition within the same speech exchange of passages of speech belonging to two different grammatical systems or subsystems” (Gumperz, 1982, p.59). Gumperz notes that code-switching occurs between two subsequent sentences or within a single sentence (Gumperz, 1982, pp. 59-60). Gumperz further states that bilingual code-switching has often been stigmatised and thought to be the result of poor mastery of one of the language codes. However, his study shows that “code switching does not necessarily indicate imperfect knowledge of the grammatical systems in question” (Gumperz, 1982, pp. 64-5). In Arabic, code-switching may occur between Arabic and a foreign language (such as French or English), or between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah. Studies of code-switching in Arabic tend to focus on speaking, with a smaller number of studies investigating code-switching in writing. The major studies of code-switching in Arabic speech have been identified as Eid (1988), which established the principles for code-switching between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah; Bassiouney (2006), with a focus on motivations for and functions of code-switching between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah; and Mejdell (2006), which added empirical evidence to the concept of the Arabic language continuum (Kaye, 2010). This section is in two parts: the first provides a general overview of the main findings of the fuṣḥá-‘āmmīyah code-switching studies by Eid (1988), Bassiouney (2006) and Mejdell (2006); the second looks at codeswitching in writing studies. 3.1.1 Code-switching in speaking Several code-switching studies have shed light on consistent code-switching patterns, such as Eid (1988), Bassiouney (2006) and Albirini (2011). The overarching findings point towards a tendency for code-switching to occur intra-sententially in speaking, that is within a sentence. The question of - ! 32 ambiguous, overlapping, or homophonous words in Arabic that can be said to belong equally to fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah is addressed in each of the studies and approached in different ways. For example, in determining the focal (switch) points in her study, Eid (1988) disregards switches at ambiguous words and includes only those from clearly one group or the other. Bassiouney (2006) concludes that the sheer amount of mixed content between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah constrained her application of the Myers-Scotton matrix language frame model (MLF) to Arabic. It is not clear that there has been any direct approach to investigating this group of ambiguous words in code-switching studies so far. As for motivations for code-switching, studies have often focused on specific situations, such as political discourse, where“there is a direct relation between change of role [in relation to the audience] and change of code. […] The speaker will usually choose a linguistic code in order to convey her or his aim” (Bassiouney, 2013, pp.72-73), using MSA to establish an authorative role, and switching to colloquial to a ’friend‘ or fellow citizen (Bassiouney, 2013, pp.74-6) - using MSA to state abstract facts and then explaining them in colloquial (Bassiouney, 2013, p.83). The ultimate aim in political discourse is persuasion, which is achieved through code-switching (Bassiouney, 2013, p.85). It is also important to note that in general codeswitching literature nowadays, the question of code choice is often put as down to the speaker, rather than the situation, as per Ferguson (1959), as confirmed by Bassiouney (2013). 3.1.1.1 Principles of Code-Switching (Eid, 1988) Eid conducted two breakthrough studies into diglossic code-switching in Arabic speech (1982 and 1988). The earlier study "examined the linguistic performance of educated speakers in Egypt as represented in a number of interviews and panel discussions aired over Cairo radio and television in 1978.” (Eid, 1988, p.53). This speech can be described as ESA, the equivalent of Badawi’s (1973) level 3. This level is arguably the most interesting linguistically, since it includes the highest level of mixing between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah forms. Eid (1988) found that “all participants without exception alternated in their use of Egyptian and Standard Arabic, - ! 33 switching from one variety to the other in what appeared to be a very ‘natural’ and appropriate mode of communication” (Eid, 1988, pp.53-4). One of the first and most significant findings of the earlier study is that diglossic code-switching in Arabic is not random, as it had been thought to be. Secondly, it identified four ‘focal points’ at which a switch can occur, by examining four syntactic constructions: relative clauses, subordinate clauses, tense and verb constructions, and negative and verb constructions. Eid found that switches can occur freely (i.e. in both fuṣḥá>‘āmmīyah and ‘āmmīyah->fuṣḥá directions) before a focal point, but that they were more constrained after a focal point. Specifically, if a focal point is fuṣḥá, it must be followed immediately by a fuṣḥá element. Where a focal point is ‘āmmīyah, it can be followed by a ‘āmmīyah or fuṣḥá element, except after the negative, meaning that a fuṣḥá verb cannot follow a ‘āmmīyah negative, since the tense in fuṣḥá is carried by the negative, not the verb itself. For example, ‫( ﻣــــش ﺑــــﯾـﻘـرا‬mish bīyi’rā, ‘isn’t reading’) is acceptable but not ‫( ﻣش ﯾﻘرأ‬mish yaqra’, ‘not reading’). Significantly, Eid (1988) made a methodological decision to disregard ambiguous forms (forms identical in both varieties) so that conclusions were “based on cases that were clearly identifiable as belonging to one or the other variety” (Eid, 1988, p.56). It is not clear how many of these forms were disregarded, but this differs from the approach taken in Chapters 5 and 6 of this study, which is to take into account the context of ambiguous forms in order to determine how to categorise them. Another point of difference between this study and Eid‘s is that Eid does not address the question of motivations for code-switching, focusing only on the linguistic aspects of the switches, whereas this study finds clear motivations in instances of code-switching in Chapters 5 and 6 below. The fact that Eid examined diglossic code-switching in speaking while this study is concerned with diglossic code-switching in writing is worthy of note at this point, since ambiguous forms (those shared between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah) are much more easily disguised in writing - especially if it is the writer‘s intention to do so, and possibly more difficult to assign to either category, since potential phonetically distinguishing features may be lost in apparently orthographically identical words. That is why this - ! 34 study argues that context and apparent motivations must be taken into consideration in assigning ambiguous forms to either category. Conversely, in speaking, instances of fuṣḥá words spoken with ‘āmmīyah pronunciation (such as a diphthong for the pronunciation of ra'aytu as ra'e:t) pose a similar issue in terms of categorisation between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah. Eid treats these as an ’intermediate‘ variety and disregards them for the purposes of identifying clear switch points. In her later study, Eid (1988) explains her earlier findings with two underlying principles of code-switching: the Contradictory Effect Constraint (CEC) whereby switching is “not permitted if the grammars of the two language varieties involved include contradictory conditions … that cannot be satisfied immediately” (Eid, 1988, p.74) and the Directionality Constraint (DC) where “if the focal point is from [fuṣḥá], switching to [‘āmmīyah] would not be permitted at the position immediately after that focal point” (Eid, 1988, p.74). Examples of switches given (Eid, 1988, pp.58-61) include the following: 1. Acceptable switching before a focal point (‘āmmīyah -> fuṣḥá): ‫ﻓﻲ اﻟظرف اﻟطﺎرق ده اﻟذي ﻟن ﯾﺳﺗﻣر‬ (Fī il-ẓarf il-tāriq dah al-ladhī lan yastamirr, ‘in this urgent situation that will not continue) The focal point in this example is the relative clause marker ‫( اﻟــــذي‬al-ladhī, ‘that’), which is preceded by a ‘āmmīyah clause (evidenced by the use of ‫)ده‬, but must be followed by a fuṣḥá clause, in this case ‫( ﻟــــن ﯾـﺳــــﺗـﻣـر‬lan yastamirr, ‘will not continue’). 2. Acceptable switching before a focal point (fuṣḥá -> ‘āmmīyah): ‫ﺑﺎﻟﻘﺿﺎﯾﺎ اﻟﻠﻲ ﺑﺗواﺟﮭﺎ ﻣﺻر‬ (Bi-al-qaḍāyā illī bitwāgihhā Maṣr, ‘with the issues that Egypt is facing’) Eid considers the focal point here to be the relative clause marker ‫( اﻟــــﻠـﻲ‬illī, ‘that’), which is preceded by the fuṣḥá word ‫( ﻗــــﺿـﺎﯾــــﺎ‬qaḍāyā, ‘issues’) pronounced in the transcript with an initial ‘q’ sound as opposed to replacing it with a glottal stop ‘hamzah’ in ‘āmmīyah. 3. Unacceptable switching after a fuṣḥá focal point: ‫ﻓﻲ اﻟوﻗت اﻟذي ﺑﻧﻌﯾﺷﮫ دﻟوﻗﺗﻲ‬ (Fī al-waqt al-ladhī bin‘īshuh dilwa’tī, ‘in the time that we are living’) - ! 35 In this example, based on responses from participants, Eid states it is unacceptable for the fuṣḥá focal point ‫( اﻟــــذي‬al-ladhī, ‘that’) to be followed by a switch to ‘āmmīyah. 4. Acceptable switch after ‘āmmīyah focal point: ‫دي اﻟﻠﻲ وﻗﻔت ﺣﯾﺎﺗﮭﺎ ﻋﻠﯾﻧﺎ‬ (Dī illī waqafat ḥayat-ha ‘ale:nā, ‘she who devoted her life to us’) Table 3.1 Summary of Eid’s code-switching principles Switch position Constraint Before focal point Free (‘āmmīyah-fuṣḥá, fuṣḥá-‘āmmīyah) After ‘āmmīyah focal point Free except negative+verb (due to CEC) After fuṣḥá focal point fuṣḥá-fuṣḥá only; fuṣḥá-‘āmmīyah not permitted (due to DC) 3.1.1.2 Mixing, and stylistic variation (Mejdell, 2011-12) Mejdell‘s (2011-12) study is presented as a survey of the various models and approaches that have been applied to spoken mixed Arabic data, including diglossia and related diglossic/continuum models; and codeswitching and mixing models, where bilingual models are adapted and applied to diglossic code-code-switching in Arabic; and suggests that the shared structures and forms of Arabic should receive more attention from analysts, as well as speakers‘ perceptions of their linguistic choices (Mejdell, 2011-12, p. 29). Mejdell proposes moving from code-switching to stylistic variation as a framework for diglossic mixed data, where ”the notion of style being the link between linguistic form and context rests on the assumption that a language community develops conventions for the language forms appropriate to various contexts“ (Mejdell, 2011-12, p. 33), particularly speakers‘ perception of the degree of formality and degree of competence in the H variety, and whether the speech is planned or unplanned. Style variation is described as a matter of tendencies, rather than prescribed rules. In an earlier study, Mejdell (2006) compares mixed speech data in an attempt to identify variation patterns and despite not finding a pattern for the frequency of variation between speakers or contexts, she does find - ! 36 a hierarchical preference for fuṣḥá variants in mixed speech. The highest level usage, or highest preference, was for the attributive demonstrative, followed by the negative markers, then the relative marker and/or complementiser. The lowest usage/preference was for pronoun suffixation. Mejdell found the same relative ordering in Bassiouney (2006) and Schulz (1981). In word-internal mixing specifically, Mejdell also found common features in constraints on diglossic mixing in Arabic identified across a number of studies. Firstly, Petersen’s (1988) Dominant Language Hypothesis (DLH) in which “dominant language (DL) grammatical items may combine with DL and with non-DL lexical items/stems, whereas non-DL grammatical items may only combine with non-DL lexical items.” (Mejdell, 2011-12, p. 35). Similarly, in the MFL model, “ML system morphemes may combine with ML and EL [embedded language] content morphemes, whereas EL system morphemes may only combine with EL content morphemes” (Mejdell, 2011-12, p.35). Further, “[all] the data on diglossic word-internal mixing in Arabic appears to confirm the principle” (Mejdell, 2011-12, p.35). The theory can be applied to Arabic with the underlying assumption for native speakers of Arabic being that the DL or ML is ‘āmmīyah, with the non-DL, or EL, as fuṣḥá. With this in mind, it is significant as it resonates with the view discussed above that ESA is essentially an elevated form of ‘āmmīyah, with insertions of fuṣḥá vocabulary. 3.1.2 Code-switching in writing Generally speaking, studies of written language mixing are far fewer than those of code-switching in speaking, as confirmed by Sebba (2012), who notes that despite the existence of a body of work in the field, that: “To say that written multilingual discourse is under-researched is an understatement. […] It has no independent theoretical framework; all linguistic research in this area to date which is not purely descriptive, has drawn on theoretical frameworks originally developed for spoken code-switching research“ (ibid; 9) - ! 37 Furthermore, Sebba notes that “published research tends to take the form of stand-alone papers, which typically deal with a single set of data […] Book-length treatments are extremely rare” (Sebba, 2012, pp.9-10), and that much of the research remains unpublished as MA dissertations. He adds that the reasons for this neglect is firstly the monolingual bias that favours the study of a specific language, and secondly the lack of a coherent framework. He therefore proposes a new approach to written mixed-language discourse, that situates it “within a broader field which deals with the semiotics of mixed-language texts in the broadness sense” and “within a literacy framework, in order to understand the acts of writing, reading and language mixing within the context of of literacy practices of which they are a part“ (italics in the original), and takes into account visual and spatial elements of the written form (Sebba, 2012, pp.10-11). Sebba‘s (2012) analytical framework is outlined below, along with Jonsson‘s (2012) study in the same volume of code-switching in Swedish texts, focusing on the local and global functions of code-switching. Finally, with regards to diglossic code-switching between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah in written Arabic, Ibrahim’s (2010) study is included below as it identifies diglossic code-switching patterns in Egyptian opposition newspapers. The findings are relevant and applicable to wider patterns of diglossic codeswitching in Arabic writing found in this study. 3.1.2.1 Analytical framework for multilingualism in written discourse (Sebba, 2012) Sebba (2012) presents a framework for the analysis of multilingual texts, in which there is a clear focus on multimodal texts (e.g. posters, signage, advertisements) and the visual and spatial elements within these. Sebba describes these texts as potentially multidimensional, containing both linguistic and visual dimensions. As such, Sebba identifies "at least two different ways in which languages can alternate within the same textual composition (such as a sign, advertisement or magazine article), reflecting degrees of integration or separation of the languages” (Sebba, 2012, p.25). These are parallelism, where the same content is repeated in the different languages, such a Welsh/English public sign, and complementarity, where the content between the languages is different, - ! 38 and may contain intra- or inter-sentential code switches, such a Maltese governmental website which contains English and Maltese text, with various forms of mixing found on both the sentential and page level (Sebba, 2012, pp.26-28). This approach focuses on the visual aspects of multilingual texts, however it would seem that in the context of longer texts, such as articles or novels, these visual aspects are perhaps less prominent and therefore would require more of a focus on the content itself in relation to the switching patterns and motivations. This, along with Sebba‘s clear distinction between the use of discrete languages, such as Welsh and English, or Maltese and English, makes it unsuitable as a framework for analysis of diglossic switching in the case of Arabic, as fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah are not discrete languages and applying these type of models can prove problematic, at least in part due to the large amount of (orthographically, if not phonologically) identical elements, as Bassiouney (2006) found when attempting to apply an established framework for spoken code-switching to Arabic, as discussed above. Further, Sebba identifies ‘units of analysis’ (p.106-8) that cover languagespatial relationships (the spatial relationships between units of language), language-content relationships (where content language is either equivalent, different or overlapping), and language mixing type, referring to the type of mixing or indeed lack of mixing, of which he identifies mixed units (those containing elements from two or more languages and corresponding to the commonly-held prototype of code-switching in spoken language (namely that languages alternate inter- and/or intrasententially); and language-neutral units, which “consist entirely of items that cannot be assigned exclusively to one language but belong equally to both (or all) the languages involved in the text. These tend to be smaller units, for example, words or headings. Brand names and other proper names often fall naturally into this category” (Sebba, 2012, p.108). It is these language-mixing types (mixed units and language-neutral units) that seem most applicable to the types of mixed-text found in Arabic, both in print and online. The visual aspects of multilingual texts (such as posters, advertisements, etc) fall outside of the scope of this study, but are an area identified for further investigation. - ! 39 3.1.2.2 Local - global functions of code-switching in writing (Jonsson, 2012) Jonsson (2012) explores the motivations behind code-switching between Swedish and Finnish in Swedish novels across the multilingual text as a whole, and concludes that code-switching serves local as well as global functions (Auer, 1998, 1999); where the local functions exist on the textual level (in conversations and explanations for non-bilingual readers), and where the global functions are power, identity and hybridity, in “novels published in a setting in which a monolingual norm prevail … and in which a high degree of code-switching has not been standard practice” (pp. 283-4). On the function of power, she states that: “The use of code-switching is inextricably linked to the concept of power. Code-switching can be used to resist, challenge and transform power relations and domination, to make silent voices heard, [and] to legitimize a certain linguistic variety (e.g. minority languages, multiethnic varieties)” (p. 284). Hybridity allows the setting up of a ‘third space’ where the relationship between two languages and/or cultures is reinforced, while at the same time maintaining a strong tie to the ‘home culture’. This is the space where new structures of authority and new political initiatives can be set up (p. 286). These global functions have a particular resonance when considering online youth political activism in Arabic, and the effect that writing, particularly with regards to code-switching and use of the vernacular, had on achieving mass political protest, discussed further in Chapter 5 below. 3.1.2.3 Written code-switching in opposition newspapers (Ibrahim, 2010) Ibrahim’s (2010) study seems to be the first to examine dialectal codeswitching in Arabic writing. Its focus on opposition newspaper headlines in Egypt is not surprising, since it is only after the 2011 protests that online writing, particularly online political writing, came under the spotlight. The study’s finding that the majority of identified switches are inter-sentential (p. 31), is significant, since as mentioned earlier, dialectal code-switching in speaking studies has tended to focus on intra-sentential switching (e.g. - ! 40 focal points, which occur within the boundaries of a sentence) and even switches within the same word. So here we see the first major difference between code-switching patterns in writing and speaking. Given the fact that writing is always something of a ‘deliberate’, ‘planned’ quality (being slower than speech and therefore allowing more time for planning than spontaneous speech), it is likely to involve less ‘spontaneous’, ‘momentary’ code-switches, e.g. where the speaker/writer cannot remember the word in the code which they have been using up to that point. The second major difference between studying code-switching in speech and in writing is the way in which it is possible to identify and treat heteronyms or ‘ambiguous’ words, which could mean the difference between a word being classed as either fuṣḥá or ‘āmmīyah. In speech it is relatively easy to identify how a word is pronounced, but unless it is clearly pronounced in such a way that would place it on either extreme of the fuṣḥá-‘āmmīyah continuum, the difficulty lies in deciding where to draw the lines on the spectrum between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah, and therefore where to place the ambiguous word on the spectrum, or how to classify it. However, in writing, the diacritical marks that could determine how a word is pronounced are rarely used. It is therefore more difficult to decide how to treat heteronyms or ambiguous words (i.e. those that are used in both fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah). This results in studies focusing on either clearly fuṣḥá or clearly ‘āmmīyah words, and excluding or overlooking the remaining words in a text. These ambiguous words that often make up the majority of the words in a sentence or text can be seen as comparable to the ‘language-neutral units’ identified by Sebba (2012) above, and clearly further research around them is needed. In the proposed theoretical framework in Chapter 4 below, the argument is made for embracing ambiguous words, and taking their use into account, rather than excluding them from the analysis, resulting in a smoother, more natural and less ambiguous or conflicted view of language use. The way this is done is by taking into account the wider context (the sentence in which the ambiguous words fall as well as the wider text), in order to - ! 41 classify them within the wider text, and in order to identify instances of code-switching, particularly inter-sentential code-switching. This entails making a judgement about how they are best ‘read’ based on the clearly fuṣḥá or clearly ‘āmmīyah words among them, as well as the wider context and message of the text. This approach is also highlighted in Mejdell (2014) in her reference to the work of Katryn Woolard, “who claims that studies on language contact phenomena almost exclusively focus on the divergent features, while the ambiguous elements tend to “drop out of the analytic account” (Woolard, 1999)” (ibid., 274). Mejdell’s study of strategic bivalency is discussed further below. 3.3 Translanguaging Rather than viewing language as a system or structure within itself, languaging views language as a dynamic process encompassing the way in which we interact with the world (Garcia & Wei, 2014, p.10). Within languaging, bilingualism is seen as dynamic, not simply additive (whereby one keeps adding more languages to one’s repertoire) (Garcia & Wei, 2014, p.13). Bilinguals are seen to have one language system made up of different languages, rather than two or more separate language systems. Since society forces us to act monolingually, translanguaging is the process whereby bilinguals are constantly searching the language repertoire for the appropriate features, which gives bilinguals a cognitive advantage (ibid.: 15). Translanguaging differs from code-switching in that it refers to the entire linguistic repertoire of an individual, and the individual’s freedom to choose items from their repertoire as they see fit, in contrast to the codeswitching view that a speaker shifts or shuttles between two languages (Garcia & Wei, 2014, p.22). If we translate the process of translanguaging to the context of Arabic, the linguistic repertoire could be seen to consist of the Arabic language as a single language repertoire, rather than two separate languages or language systems, in which translanguaging is the process of searching for and choosing the appropriate items. This would explain the trends of mixing, switching, levelling, etc, that have been observed in Arabic - ! 42 speaking and writing, since “Translanguaging is the discursive norm in bilingual families and communities” (Garcia & Wei, 2014, p.23), that is if we take the view that the bilingual communities in this case are Arabicspeaking societies. It could also explain practices such as bilingual codeswitching between Arabic and foreign languages, as well as the practice of writing Arabic in Latin script. Arabic speakers are simply using the full scope of their linguistic repertoire, including fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah forms as well as foreign languages, and constantly searching for and choosing the appropriate features within their repertoire. 3.4 Intermediate Arabic Intermediate Arabic has been described as a writing style of several prominent writers, referred to as simplified fuṣḥá, a compromise between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah, or a middle language between the two. Several writers who have written in an intermediate form of Arabic, and studies of their language use are discussed below, revealing some salient features of Intermediate Arabic. Among the writers that have been described as writing in intermediate Arabic, are the following: * Farah Anton (1874-1922): in his play Miṣr al-Jadīdah (‘New Egypt’) Anton writes that he uses three levels of language: fuṣḥá, for the elite class; ‘āmmīyah, for the lower class; and a ‘middle language’ for the female characters specifically, described as “neither fuṣḥá nor ‘āmmīyah”, but a “simplified fuṣḥá or enlightened ‘āmmīyah” (Badawi, 1973, p.70). He is also mentioned as using a “mixed dialogue” in Somekh (1975, p.90). Anton is the least well-known writer in this group, as confirmed by Badawi, so a further analysis of his language use and works has not been included in this study. * Tawfīq al-Hakim (1898-1987): although well-known for his ‘third language’ concept, al-Hakim’s writing can be said to cover three styles: fuṣḥá, ‘āmmīyah - albeit in only three of his 80 plays (Badawi, 1987), and his ‘third language’, discussed in more detail below. * Yusuf Sibai (1917-1978): in his struggle between the urge to write at least partially in ‘āmmīyah, and the “uncompromising prejudice” against it, - ! 43 Sibai’s writing passed through three stages: in the first stage he wrote strictly in fuṣḥá; in the second stage he wrote fuṣḥá narrative and ‘āmmīyah dialogue; and finally his third stage was a ‘compromise’ between the two, which seems to be his dominant and favoured style (Abdel-Malek, 1972). * Yusuf Idris (1927-91): most well-known for his use of fuṣḥá narrative and ‘āmmīyah dialogue, upon closer inspection it seems Idris used a style that can be said to be Intermediate, since the narrative text has been described as following the patterns and structures of ‘āmmīyah, as well as being interspersed with ‘āmmīyah words (Kurpershoek, 1981). Meanwhile the dialogue, although often identifiably ‘āmmīyah, has at times been seen to be ‘mixed’ (Somekh, 1975). Although the different writers have taken different approaches to each writing style, it would appear that use of a middle/mixed/third style is an established writing technique, characterised by a somewhat relaxed approach to the rules of fuṣḥá and an incorporation of elements of ‘āmmīyah - whether single words, phrases or expressions. It is this style, and aspects of it, such as code-switching and strategic bivalency, that are discussed in more detail below. 3.4.1 Tawfiq al- Hakim’s ‘Third Language’ Tawfiq al-Hakim (1898-1987), the prominent Egyptian writer, advocated his novel approach to writing in Arabic, which he called the ‘third language’ and which he believed would eventually replace the fuṣḥá - ‘āmmīyah dichotomy. Hakim’s ‘third language' seems to have been born out of his frustration with the fuṣḥá - ‘āmmīyah language situation that meant his work needed to be ‘translated’ in order to be performed on stage, an absurdity he believes is completely avoidable by expanding fuṣḥá to absorb some of the features of ‘āmmīyah, as is the case in other languages. Hakim’s aim is for the Arabic language to become one, unified language - an aim he sees as perfectly realistic given that, in his view, the similarities between the two forms are greater than the differences, and that ‘āmmīyah is evidently and naturally being ‘elevated’ towards fuṣḥá. Hakim addresses directly the ‘language problem’ of fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah in two of his plays, written ten years apart. In his 1956 play ‘Al-Safqah’ (‘The - ! 44 Deal’, pp. 157-158), he stated that he had previously written two plays in the same context, that of the Egyptian countryside: one in fuṣḥá, the other in ‘āmmīyah. The result, in Hakim’s view, was that the former was suitable for reading but needed ‘translation’ in order to be suitable for the stage and therefore did not provide a final solution to the language problem, while the latter posed a problem in its universality, since it would not be understood in any time or place, so similarly could not provide a final solution to the language problem. The result was the language of ‘Al-Safqah’, born of an attempt to achieve a form that would not contradict the rules of fuṣḥá and at the same time would sound natural when spoken and could be understood in any time or place. This language can be read equally as wholly fuṣḥá or ‘āmmīyah, simply by changing one’s pronunciation of words by their phonetic variations (for example pronouncing the /q/ phoneme in fuṣḥá but as the glottal hamzah in the urban dialects, or /g/ in the rural dialects (of Egypt). This new language, argues al-Hakim, would lead to the linguistic unification of the literary Arabic, and (more importantly) bring closer the different social classes and Arabic nations. al-Hakim addresses the language of his play again and in more detail in ‘AlWarta’ (pp. 166-176), his 60th published play, to clarify his position on the Arabic language and vision for the ‘third language’, which can be summarised as follows: 1. Despite his writing in a simplified form of fuṣḥá, he finds his plays still need adaptation into ‘āmmīyah (a language situation that al-Hakim finds unacceptable due to his ultimate vision of a unified Arabic language and society) 2. The gap between ‘āmmīyah and fuṣḥá is getting smaller each day: while others believe that there is a big gap between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah and that fuṣḥá is under threat (because it is not spoken), al-Hakim believes the gap is in fact getting smaller each day and it is ‘āmmīyah that is under threat, citing examples of how fuṣḥá terms and structures have entered everyday language even in the language of the fellah (farmer/ peasant) as evidence of its growing influence over ‘āmmīyah. - ! 45 3. al-Hakim further believes that fuṣḥá should embrace and absorb the phonetic variances and abbreviations found in ‘āmmīyah, for example the demonstrative pronoun ‫( دا‬da, ‘this’) instead of the full fuṣḥá form ‫( ھــذا‬hādha, ‘this’), the negative marker ‫ش‬-‫( ﻣــﺎ‬mā-sh, ‘not’) as in ‫( ﻣـﺎﻋـرﻓـش‬mā’rafsh, ‘I don’t know’) instead of the full fuṣḥá form ‫ﻣـﺎ أﻋـرف‬ ‫( ﺷــﻲء‬mā a‘rif shay’, ‘I don’t know’) in the same way that ‘I’m’ is accepted as a shortened form of ‘I am’ in English, ‘I’ll’ for ‘I will’ etc, believing this to be an example of English fuṣḥá embracing common features of speech leading to the loss of the duality of language in English. 4. Rather than viewing ‘āmmīyah as a separate language, al-Hakim argues that it is made up of abbreviations and phonetic variations to fuṣḥá and that recognising and accepting this, and absorbing its variations into fuṣḥá would unify the language and remove the need for separate written and spoken forms of the language. Hakim cites the example of the seven readings of the Qur’an as evidence that one written language can be read in different ways. 5. al-Hakim’s ultimate aim is the unification of the Arabic language, and gradual ‘elevation’ of ‘āmmīyah to the level of fuṣḥá, as a natural progression of the language given the trajectory he sees in evidence around him. He views the Arabic language as one language with phonetic variants and abbreviated forms, rather than two separate languages that require ‘translation’ between them. He stresses the similarities between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah rather than the differences, and views them as minor variants rather than there being a huge gulf between them. Despite al-Hakim’s description of the third language, it is not clear to what degree he applied it consistently in his works. An initial look at his post-1956 works seems to suggest that his writing style varied from work to work, at times using language that can be read as either fuṣḥá or ‘āmmīyah, and at other times using clearly either fuṣḥá or ‘āmmīyah. As for the allowances he says should be made in fuṣḥá, we find again that he seems to apply these inconsistently, at times using the full fuṣḥá terms, such as the demonstrative pronoun ‫( ھــــذا‬hādha, ‘this’) and the relative pronoun ‫( اﻟــــذي‬al-ladhi, ‘that/who’) etc, while at other times using the - ! 46 abbreviated ‘āmmīyah forms such as ‫( دا‬dah, ‘this’) and ‫( اﻟـــﻠﻲ‬illī, ‘that/who’) etc. To what extent these variations are deliberate is an interesting question and identified as an area for further study. In fact, a detailed linguistic study of al-Hakim’s use of language throughout his career would no doubt shed further light on his practical application of the ‘third language’ and the ways in which he adapts it to best suit his needs as a dramatic writer. Badawi (1973) confirms that to his knowledge no systematic study of al-Hakim’s third language has been undertaken, and to my own knowledge, no such study seems to have been undertaken in the years since 1973. In conclusion, we can say that al-Hakim’s third language is a vision for a unified Arabic language, that is largely a simplified form of fuṣḥá, and that accepts some widespread (and one could say, compatible) features of ‘āmmīyah such as phonetic variations and abbreviations. The third language highlights the similarities between written and spoken Arabic as part of one, unified language, rather than highlighting their differences. Further, al-Hakim believes that in the fuṣḥá - ‘āmmīyah dichotomy, it is ‘āmmīyah that is under threat from the influence of fuṣḥá on everyday language, rather than the other way around. In light of this, al-Hakim believes the third language will be realised as a natural result of the decline of ‘āmmīyah due the infiltration of fuṣḥá into everyday spoken Arabic. To what extent al-Hakim’s vision has been realised in the Arabic language situation today is another point worthy of further study, since it can be argued that the gap between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah as two distinct varieties is indeed diminishing, as evidenced by this study and others like it of modern Arabic usage. 3.4.2 Yusuf Sibai (1917-1978) Yusuf Sibai is another prominent Egyptian writer and contemporary of Tawfik al-Hakim. Several of Sibai's novels have been adapted into films, which - ! 47 have gained widespread recognition6. In Abdel Malek (1972), he is described as: “…one of the most prolific of all Arab novelists: between 1947 and 1968 he wrote forty-five books of which Rudd Qalbī, Nādīyah, Jaffat alDumū‘, Layl Lahu Ākhir and Naḥnu Lā Nazra‘ al-Shawk consist of almost a thousand pages each. Furthermore, Sibai is one of the most widely-read of all Arab novelists, and one of the most popular.” (p. 134-5) Abdel-Malek further describes Sibai as having “passed through three stages of linguistic expression” (p. 133). These are: fuṣḥá, then fuṣḥá with an occasional borrowing from ‘āmmīyah in the narrative and ‘āmmīyah in the dialogue, and finally what Abdel-Malek sees as a ‘compromise’ between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah, which he describes as “more acceptable to the purists than the style of the preceding stage though less acceptable than the style of the first stage [and which] succeeds in creating the impression that the characters converse in the normal speech of everyday life” (p. 134). In his analysis of the third stage, the compromise between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah, Abdel-Malek describes the writing style of the novels as being fuṣḥá for the narrative, with occasional (single-word) borrowings from ‘āmmīyah or foreign languages. For the dialogue Abdel-Malek identifies “four devices that bridge the gap between MSA and the speech of everyday life” (p. 135). They are: borrowing, use of ‘low-Standard’ vocabulary, reshaping of colloquial expressions, and elimination of case contrasts from some nouns and adjectives. Below are some of the examples from Abdel-Malek’s study (p. 135-41), which is the most detailed study of an intermediate style of Arabic writing that exists, with the addition of Romanisation and translation of examples, which were not provided in the original study. Further challenges are the lack of context in 6 The Egyptian national newspaper Al-Ahram claims six of the 100 top Egyptian ﬁlms as being adaptations of Sibai’s novels: http://www.ahram.org.eg/archive/ Cinema/News/25083.aspx - ! 48 the original study, with single-word examples and phrases given with no context or explanation so the Romanisation and translations given below are best estimates. It is also unclear from the original study whether shared forms were intended to be read in fuṣḥá or ‘āmmīyah, so the phonetic equivalent of the letters written are given in the Romanisation, for example ‫ ظـﮭــــر‬is transliterated as ẓuhr (‘noon’ or ‘early afternoon’), although its pronunciation in ‘āmmīyah would be ḍuhr. The Romanisation of the definite article ‫‘( اﻟـ‬the’) is given as il in ‘āmmīyah phrases, and similarly the connector ‫‘( و‬and’) is given as wi in ‘āmmīyah phrases. 3.4.2.1 Borrowing Abdel-Malek finds that Sibai makes use of foreign (mainly French and English) and ‘āmmīyah content words. Abdel-Malek points out that despite Sibai’s use of ‘āmmīyah words and expressions, his spelling conventions are very close to fuṣḥá, which seems to be typical in ‘āmmīyah writing, as discussed further in Chapter 4 below. * Foreign words: excluded from Abdel-Malek’s analysis are foreign words are that have been absorbed into Arabic; either into fuṣḥá such as ‫ﺗــــﻠﯾﻔون‬ (tilīfūn, ‘telephone’), ‫( ﺑــﻧك‬bank, ‘bank’) and ‫( دﻛــﺗور‬duktūr, ‘doctor’), or into ‘āmmīyah such as ‫( ﺳــــﺎﻧــــدوﺗــــش‬sāndawitsh, ‘sandwich’) and ‫درﻛـﺳــــﯾـون‬ (diriksīyūn, ‘steering wheel’). This leaves words like ‫( ھـﺎﻟـو‬hālū, ‘hello’), ‫ول‬ (wil, ‘well’), ‫( ﺗــﯾم‬tīm, team), ‫( ﺟــﻣﻧزﯾــوم‬jimnazyūm, ‘gymnasium’), and ‫ﺑــوﻧــﺟور‬ (būnjūr, ‘bonjour’). This type of borrowing is often found in online writing, as will be discussed further in Chapter 5 below. * ‘āmmīyah words and expressions: these are divided into: contentives, functors, stereotyped expressions, non-stereotyped expressions, and grammatical constructions. Examples of each are given in Table 3.2 below, since they highlight specific words, phrases and techniques used in Intermediate Arabic, which hitherto has been described vaguely as a mix, compromise or in-between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah, without specific examples or details of what IA actually looks like or how it is achieved in literary writing. - ! 49 Table 3.2 Examples of ‘āmmīyah words and expressions as categorised by Abdel-Malek (1972) Contentives ‘playground’ ‘jacket' ‘vest’ ‘thread' ‘foolish' ‘to glare’ fasaḥah jākittah fānillah fatlah ‘abīṭah yuzghud ‫ﻓﺳﺣﺔ‬ ‫ﺟﺎﻛﺗﺔ‬ ‫ﻓﺎﻧﻠﺔ‬ ‫ﻓﺗﻠﺔ‬ ‫ﻋﺑﯾطﺔ‬ ‫ﯾزﻏد‬ Functors ‘of course’, ‘why!’ ummāl wow!’ Allāh! ‘what a’ (What a surprise!) ammā ‘Mr’ (‘Mr Omar’) sī (sī ‘umar) ‘I wish’ yā re:t ‘why not’ wi-māluh Stereotyped expressions (Idioms, Sayings, Others) - idioms (expression of pride) ‘alá sinn wi-rumḥ lit. ‘empty eyes’ (a person ‘uyūn fārghah who is never satisfied with what they have) ‘no way’ yiftaḥ Allāh ‘anyway' mā ‘ale:nā ‘neither here nor there’ lā hinā wa-lā hināk ‫أﻣّﺎل‬ !‫ﷲ‬ (!‫أﻣّﺎ )أﻣّﺎ ﻣﻔﺎﺟﺄة‬ (‫ﺳﻲ )ﺳﻲ ﻋﻣر‬ ‫ﯾﺎ رﯾت‬ ‫وﻣﺎﻟﮫ‬ ‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﺳنّ ورﻣﺢ‬ ‫ﻋﯾون ﻓﺎرﻏﺔ‬ ‫ﯾﻔﺗﺢ ﷲ‬ ‫ﻣﺎ ﻋﻠﯾﻧﺎ‬ ‫ﻻ ھﻧﺎ وﻻ ھﻧﺎك‬ (‘I’m neither here nor there’) (anā lā hinā wa-lā hināk) (‫)أﻧﺎ ﻻ ھﻧﺎ وﻻ ھﻧﺎك‬ - sayings (to make a futile attempt to gih naqqabha ‘alá ‫ﺟﮫ ﻧﻘﺑﮭﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺷوﻧﺔ‬ advance/improve an aspect sho:nah of your life) ‘like mother like daughter’ ikfi il-garrah ‘alá ‫اﻛف اﻟﺟرّ ة ﻋﻠﻰ ﻓﻣّﮭﺎ ﺗطﻠﻊ‬ fammahā tiṭla‘ il-bint ‫اﻟﺑﻧت ﻻﻣّﮭﺎ‬ li-ummahā - others ‘(God) damn you’ Allāh yikhrib be:tuh ‫ﷲ ﯾﺧرب ﺑﯾﺗﮫ‬ ‘(God) bless you’ ‫ﷲ ﯾﻌﻣّر ﺑﯾﺗﮫ‬ Allāh yi‘ammar be:tuh ‘Excuse me’ ‫ﻻ ﻣؤاﺧذة‬ lā mu’ākhdhah Non-stereotyped expressions ‘He left, may he never return’ rāh, Allah lā yiragga‘uh ‫ ﷲ ﻻ ﯾرﺟﻌّﮫ‬،‫راح‬ ‘Which one should I help?’ ‫أﺷﯾل ﻣﯾن ﻓﯾﮭم؟‬ ashīl mīn fīhum? ‘a snob’ (male) ‫راﺟل أﻟﯾط‬ rāgil alīt - ! 50 ّ ‫ﻣش‬ ‫ﺑطﺎل‬ ‘not bad’ mish baṭṭāl ‫ﺣﺎﺿر ﯾﺎ ﻓﻧدم‬ ‘yes, sir/madam’ ḥāḍir yā fandim Grammatical constructions: - conjoining verbs by mere juxtaposition (i.e. without a conjunction) ‫ﻗوﻣﻲ اﻟﺑﺳﻲ‬ ‘go get dressed’ ūmī ilbisī - repetition of an element to signal indifference ‫ﺷﯾوﻋﯾّون ﺷﯾوﻋﯾّون‬ ‘communist communists’ shīyū’īyīn shīyū‘īyīn - apposition between an indefinite noun and a definite one ‘at nanny Fatma’s’ ‘and dādah Fāṭmah ‫ﻋﻧد دادة ﻓﺎطﻣﺔ‬ - the use of wa to indicate continuity ‫ﺛﻼث ﺳﺎﻋﺎت وأﻧﺎ واﻗف‬ ‘three hours while waiting on thalāth sā’āt wa-anā my feet’ wāqif ‘alá qadamī ‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﻗدﻣﻲ‬ - lack of agreement between certain modifiers nouns 'a pink dress’ fustān bambah ‫ﻓﺳﺗﺎن ﺑﻣﺑﺔ‬ ‘pink flowers’ zuhūr bambah ‫زھور ﺑﻣﺑﺔ‬ ‘unsophisticated people’ (lit. nās baladī ‫ﻧﺎس ﺑﻠدي‬ country people) 3.4.2.2 Use of ‘low-Standard’ vocabulary Abdel-Malek identifies three levels of fuṣḥá vocabulary: * High Standard: these are words that are used exclusively in fuṣḥá, such as ‫( ﺣذاء‬ḥidha’, shoes). * Mid-Standard: shared words between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah, that do not have alternatives in fuṣḥá or ‘āmmīyah, but may have phonetic variants, such as ‫( ﺻﺎﺋم‬ṣā;im, ‘one who is fasting’). * Low-Standard: words that exist in both fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah, but their use in ‘āmmīyah means they have “acquired a colloquial flavour that discourages the purists from using them” (p. 139), such as ‫دوّ خ‬ (dawwakh, ‘made tired’, lit. dizzied), which in fuṣḥá would be expressed as the high-Standard ‫( أرھق‬arhaqa, ‘made tired’). - ! 51 Table 3.3 Fuṣḥá levels and example vocabulary Fuṣḥá level Examples ‘get up’ (fem.) inhaḍī ‘laid down (fem.) High-Standard (exclusive) muḍṭagi‘ah ‫اﻧﮭﺿﻲ‬ ‫ﻣﺿطﺟﻌﺔ‬ ‘made tired’ arhaqa ‫أرھق‬ ‘shoes' ḥidhā’ ‫ﺣذاء‬ ‘one who is fasting’ ṣā;im ‫ﺻﺎﺋم‬ Low-Standard ‘get up’ (fem.) qūmī ‫ﻗوﻣﻲ‬ (shared, but have highStandard alternative) 'laid down’ (fem) rāqdah ‫راﻗدة‬ dawwakh ‫دوّ خ‬ Mid-Standard (shared, no alternatives) ‘made tired’ (lit. dizzied) The vocabulary items that are shared between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah can be divided into three types: * identical items, such as: (katab, ‘to write’) ‫ﻛﺗب‬ (dars, ‘lesson’) ‫درس‬ (min, ‘from’) ‫ﻣن‬ (balad, ‘country’) ‫ﺑﻠد‬ * phonetically-variant items, where the pronunciation is consistently and identifiably different in each form, such as: (qalb, pronounced ’alb, ‘heart’) ‫ﻗﻠب‬ (‘arabīy, pronounced ‘arabi) ّ‫ﻋرﺑﻲ‬ (nā’im, pronounced nāyim) ‫ﻧﺎﺋم‬ * similar items with undefined variations, such as: (rāgil, ‘man’) ‫راﺟل‬ / (ragul, ‘man’) ‫رﺟل‬ (marā, ‘woman’) ‫ﻣرا‬ / (imra’ah, ‘woman’) ‫اﻣرأة‬ (‘arabīyah, ‘car/t’) ‫ﻋرﺑﯾﺔ‬ / (‘arbah, ‘car/t’) ‫ﻋرﺑﺔ‬ Abdel-Malek observes that Sibai prefers to use low-Standard words, which can be said to be a characteristic of Intermediate Arabic. The differences between shared items in fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah that are highlighted above are discussed further in Chapter 4 below. - ! 52 3.4.2.3 Reshaping of ‘āmmīyah expressions At the same time as using shared, ‘low-Standard’ vocabulary, Sibai uses ‘āmmīyah expressions reshaped with fuṣḥá structures and vocabulary, such as: Table 3.4 Examples of reshaped ‘āmmīyah expressions Reshaped expression Romanisation, translation ‫ﺳﻠﯾم أرﺑﻌﺔ وﻋﺷرﯾن ﻗﯾراطﺎ‬ salīm arba‘ah wi-‘ishrīn qīrāṭ, ‘completely sound/intact/correct’ salīm mīyah fī il-mīyah, ‘completely sound/intact/correct’ zayy il-ginn il-azraq, ‫ﻛﺎﻟﺟنّ اﻷزرق‬ ‘versatile’; ‘Jack of all trades’ fātak nuṣ ‘umrak, ‫ﻓﺎﺗك ﻧﺻف ﻋﻣرك‬ ‘you’ve missed out’ warrānī nugūm il-ẓuhr, ‘caused ‫أراﻧﻲ ﻧﺟوم اﻟظﮭر‬ me hell’ tishtaghal ‘ale:h, ‘to work on it’ ‫ﺗﺷﺗﻐل ﻋﻠﯾﮫ‬ addahā lī wi-anā wāqif, ‫أﻋطﺎھﺎ ﻟﻲ وأﻧﺎ واﻗف‬ ‘he gave it to me on the spot’ mayhimminīsh Ramaḍān, ‫ﻻ ﯾﮭﻣّﻧﻲ رﻣﺿﺎن‬ ‘I don’t care about Ramadan’ rāgil amīr, ‫رﺟل أﻣﯾر‬ ‘a princely [kind] man’ ti’milī il-‘amlah, ‘(you fem.) do the ‫ﺗﻌﻣﻠﯾن اﻟﻌﻣﻠﺔ‬ deed’ limmī nafsik, ‘behave yourself’ ‫ﻟﻣّﻲ ﺟﺳﻣك‬ ‫ ﻻ ﺑ ّد أن اﻟﺛوب ﻟم ﯾﺄت ﻣن‬lāzim il-tho:b’ magāsh min ‘and il-makwagī, ‘it seems the clothes ‫ﻋﻧد اﻟﻣﻛوﺟﻲ‬ are not back from the ironer’ ‫ﺳﻠﯾم ﻣﺎﺋﺔ ﻓﻲ اﻟﻣﺎﺋﺔ‬ ‘āmmīyah expression ‫ﺳﻠﯾم أرﺑﻌﺔ وﻋﺷرﯾن ﻗﯾراط‬ ‫ﺳﻠﯾم ﻣﯾّﺔ ﻓﻲ اﻟﻣﯾّﺔ‬ ‫َزيّ اﻟﺟنّ اﻷزرق‬ ‫ﻓﺎﺗك ﻧص ﻋﻣرك‬ ‫ورّ اﻧﻲ ﻧﺟوم اﻟظﮭر‬ ‫ﺗﺷﺗﻐل ﻋﻠﯾﮫ‬ ‫أدّھﺎ ﻟﻲ وأﻧﺎ واﻗف‬ ‫ﻣﺎ ﯾﮭﻣّﻧﯾش رﻣﺿﺎن‬ ‫راﺟل أﻣﯾر‬ ‫ﺗﻌﻣﻠﻲ اﻟﻌﻣﻠﺔ‬ ‫ﻟﻣّﻲ ﻧﻔﺳك‬ ‫ﻻزم ”اﻟﺛوب“ ﻣﺎﺟﺎش ﻣن‬ ‫ﻋﻧد اﻟﻣﻛوﺟﻲ‬ It is interesting to note that Sibai uses some unmodified ‘āmmīyah expressions as mentioned above, as well as modifying others. This can be said to be a feature of Intermediate Arabic, although precisely why some expressions are modified and others aren’t, such as ‫( راﺟـــل أﻟـــﯾط‬rāgil alīt, ‘a snobbish man’) and ‫( رﺟـــل أﻣـــﯾر‬ragul amīr, ‘a princely [kind] man’) is an interesting point worth investigating further. It could be that ‘āmmīyah expressions are left unmodified if their component words are shared between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah, and fall within the ‘identical’ or ‘phonetically-variant’ type, since they could ‘pass’ for fuṣḥá - ! 53 while retaining their ‘āmmīyah flavour or meaning; whereas undefined variations or unshared items are modified if the rest of the component words of the expression are ‘identical’ or ‘phonetically-variant’, possibly because reshaping the expression would be minimal and allow the reference to the ‘āmmīyah expression to remain recognisable; and finally undefined variations that occur with non-shared vocabulary are left unmodified as any modification would take too much away from its ‘colloquial’ flavour. Taking the ‫( راﺟـل أﻟـﯾط‬rāgil alīt, ‘a snobbish man’) and ‫رﺟـل‬ ‫( أﻣـــﯾر‬ragul amīr, ‘a princely [kind] man’) example, they can be analysed as follows: :(rajul amīr, ‘a princely [kind] man’) ‫رﺟل أﻣﯾر‬ undefined variant + identical item = modified expression :(rāgil alīṭ, ‘a snobbish man’) ‫راﺟل أﻟﯾط‬ undefined variant + non-shared item = non-modified expression Applying this same procedure to the rest of the examples of modified ‘āmmīyah expressions given above, shows it seems to be applied fairly consistently: ‫ﺳﻠﯾم أرﺑﻌﺔ وﻋﺷرﯾن ﻗﯾراطﺎ‬ :(salīm arba‘ah wa-‘ishrīn qīrāṭā, ‘completely sound/intact/correct’) 3 x identical words (including the prefixal conjunction wa) + phonetic/ grammatical variant = modified expression :(salīm mi’ah fī al-mi’ah, ‘completely sound/intact/correct’) ‫ﺳﻠﯾم ﻣﺎﺋﺔ ﻓﻲ اﻟﻣﺎﺋﺔ‬ identical word + phonetic variant + identical word + phonetic variant = modified expression ‫ﻛﺎﻟﺟنّ اﻷزرق‬ :(ka-al-jinn al-azraq, ‘versatile’; ‘Jack of all trades’) identical word (excluding the prefixal preposition ka*) + identical word = modified expression *the modification of the prefixal preposition ka in this instance is interesting, but without the full context one needs to make a judgement about its inclusion. Since it is not a stand-alone word, its effect on the expression can be said to be minimal (i.e. the ‘āmmīyah expression doesn’t lose its flavour), - ! 54 and is also close in meaning and form to the shared, phonetically-variant form ‫ﻛﺄن‬. :(fātak niṣf ‘umrika, ‘you’ve missed out’) ‫ﻓﺎﺗك ﻧﺻف ﻋﻣرك‬ identical word + undefined variant + identical word = modified expression :(arānī nujūm al-ẓuhr, ‘caused me hell’) ‫أراﻧﻲ ﻧﺟوم اﻟظﮭر‬ non-shared word + identical word + phonetic variant = modified expression :(tashtaghal ‘alayh, ‘to work on it’) ‫ﺗﺷﺗﻐل ﻋﻠﯾﮫ‬ (It is not immediately clear what has been modified from this expression.) :(a‘ṭāhā lī wa-anā wāqif, ‘he gave it to me while waiting’) ‫أﻋطﺎھﺎ ﻟﻲ وأﻧﺎ واﻗف‬ non-shared word + 3x identical word (including the prefixal conjunction wa) = modified expression :(lā yahummunī Ramaḍān, ‘I don’t care about Ramadan’) ‫ﻻ* ﯾﮭﻣّﻧﻲ رﻣﺿﺎن‬ identical word (‫ )ﯾﮭﻣﻧﻲ‬+ identical word = modified expression (*grammar of ‫ ﻣﺎﯾﮭﻣﻧﯾش‬modified to ‫)ﻻ ﯾﮭﻣﻧﻲ‬ :(ta‘malīn al-‘amlah, ‘(you fem.) do the deed’) ‫ﺗﻌﻣﻠﯾن* اﻟﻌﻣﻠﺔ‬ identical word (‫ )ﺗﻌﻣﻠﻲ‬+ identical word = modified expression (*grammar of ‫ ﺗﻌﻣﻠﻲ‬modified to ‫)ﺗﻌﻣﻠﯾن‬ :(limmī jusmaki, ‘behave yourself’) ‫ﻟﻣّﻲ ﺟﺳﻣك‬ identical word (‫ )ﻟﻣّﻲ‬+ non-shared word (‫ = *)ﻧﻔﺳك‬modified expression *this is an assumption that the word ‫ﻧﻔﺳك‬, technically a shared word but not used in the same sense, has been replaced with ‫)ﺟﺳﻣك‬ ‫ﻻ ﺑ ّد أن اﻟﺛوب ﻟم ﯾﺄت ﻣن ﻋﻧد اﻟﻣﻛوﺟﻲ‬ (lā budd anna al-thawb lam ya’tī min ‘ind al-makwajī, ‘it seems the clothes are not back from the ironer’) (Abdel-Malek gives the fuṣḥá equivalent of this phrase as ‫ﻋــــﻧـد اﻟــــﻛـواء‬, which seems to suggest that Sibai tried to keep the ‘colloquial flavour’ by keeping the ‘āmmīyah structure (‫ )ﻻزم اﻟـ”ﺛـــوب“ ﻣـــﺎ ﺟـــﺎش ﻣـــن ﻋـــﻧد اﻟـــﻣﻛوﺟـــﻲ‬and replacing ‘āmmīyah words with fuṣḥá́ equivalents, but keeping the final - ! 55 ‘āmmīyah word (‫)ﻣــــﻛـوﺟــــﻲ‬. Otherwise it is not immediately clear why this sentence has been categorised as a ‘āmmīyah expression.) In short, it seems Sibai is indeed concerned with preserving the flavour of ‘āmmīyah expressions, while at the same time applying as many narrowing strategies between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah as possible. The result is seen in the modifications to ‘āmmīyah expressions are made where possible, such as keeping spelling and grammar conventions as close to fuṣḥá as possible; while at the same time allowances are made for keeping ‘āmmīyah expressions whose constituent components are shared lexical items between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah, and expressions that contain exclusively ‘āmmīyah items that would lose their flavour if modified. This can be seen as one of the writing strategies of Intermediate Arabic, along with al-Hakim’s tolerance of abbreviated and phonetically-variant forms. 3.4.2.4 Elimination of case contrasts from some nouns and adjectives Abdel-Malek observes that the elimination of case endings is usually applied to proper nouns (names of characters), and occasionally to borrowings from ‘āmmīyah. So it can be said that overall, case (and mood) endings have been observed, with the exception of proper nouns and occasionally with borrowed words. This is important to note, since it shows that the overall grammar of fuṣḥá is observed in this example of Intermediate Arabic. 3.4.3 Yusuf Idris (1927-91) One of the most recognisable names in Arabic literature, Yusuf Idris is widely known for his adoption of the fuṣḥá narrative, ‘āmmīyah dialogue writing technique. However, he is included in this section about Intermediate Arabic because despite this binary fuṣḥá-‘āmmīyah label of his work, it has been observed that his style is more complex than this would suggest. Firstly, the fuṣḥá narrative and ‘āmmīyah dialogue do not seem to be as strictly separate in terms of language use as they have been labelled, with ‘āmmīyah insertions made into the fuṣḥá text and vice versa (Kurpershoek, 1981), while the language of the narration reflects “the patterns of ordinary speech rather than the rules of classical grammar” (Kurpershoek, 1981: 115). This seems to suggest a language - ! 56 form closer to Intermediate Arabic than purely fuṣḥá. Secondly, his attitude towards the language situation suggests that he views the language as a single linguistic repertoire of which he makes full use, a view that is compatible with the use of Intermediate Arabic. In fact, he was quoted as saying, “I only distinguish between standard and dialectal language in so far as one word rather than another accurately expresses what I want to say7 .” (ibid.: 124). It would seem that rather than being driven by ideology to find an intermediate form of language between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah, Idris simply did what we see many native speakers doing today, which is to use the full breadth of their linguistic repertoire, navigating through it in search of the appropriate term for what they want to express. Or in other words, what he is expressing is the process of ‘translanguaging’, as discussed previously in this chapter. A more detailed study of Idris’s language use (Somekh, 1975) confirms that: “… it would be untrue to say that in Idrīs’ stories in general the ‘āmmīyah is confined to the dialogue, or that the dialogue is always rendered in purely spoken idiom. For one thing, the narrative parts are heavily permeated with elements of ‘āmmīyah - both in matters of vocabulary as well as structure.” (p.90) In comparing Idris’s use of Intermediate Arabic as per Somekh’s (1975) study to Sibai’s, using Abdel-Malek’s (1972) terminology as discussed above, one finds that both: * make frequent use of or ‘borrow’ ‘āmmīyah words (in fuṣḥá passages) * use ‘low-Standard’ fuṣḥá vocabulary (i.e. words that exist in fuṣḥá but are commonly used in ‘āmmīyah and have thus acquired a colloquial ‘flavour’) * use syntactic structures of ‘āmmīyah in passages of fuṣḥá, or to use Abdel-Malek’s words, borrow colloquial expressions (stereotyped and non-stereotyped), grammatical constructions, and reshape (or modify) colloquial expressions 7 Quotation in Kurpershoek from N. Farag. 1971. Yūsuf Idrīs. In Mag. Jan, 102. - ! 57 * borrow from foreign languages (notably English): in the case of Sibai by transcribing foreign words not absorbed into Arabic (neither fuṣḥá nor ‘āmmīyah); and in the case of Idris by borrowing syntactic structures from English. While less comprehensive than Abdel-Malek, Somekh has shed some light and dispelled some myths around Idris’s language use. Rather than describing his language use as fuṣḥá narrative and ‘āmmīyah dialogue, what Somekh has described bears closer resemblance to an Intermediate form of Arabic in the narrative, accompanied by ‘āmmīyah or at times ‘mixed’ ‘āmmīyah dialogue. Finally, in comparing Sibai and Idris, it seems that Sibai (perhaps owing to his background in senior government positions and therefore his role as part of the establishment), faced an internal struggle between the way he would have liked to have written (i.e. ‘āmmīyah) and the established way of writing (i.e. fuṣḥá). After writing initially in fuṣḥá, he switched to fuṣḥánarrative and ‘āmmīyah-dialogue, before reaching a ‘compromise’ between the two; a compromise that perhaps he would have felt appeased himself as well as the writing establishment. On the other hand, Idris (who as a medical doctor was something of an outsider to the writing establishment) makes unapologetic use of ‘āmmīyah, whether in whole passages of dialogue, or in his ‘fuṣḥá’ narrative. In his own words he writes whichever words he feels best suit his message, making less of a distinction between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah. Adding al-Hakim to the comparison, it seems he is the most reserved with his vision for the third language, in which he seems to make allowances only for abbreviated forms and phonetic variants. His ideological aim of elevating ‘āmmīyah to the level of fuṣḥá seems to suggest a gradual erasure of ‘āmmīyah forms that are not compatible with fuṣḥá, and an ideological stance against ‘āmmīyah, despite his advocacy of adopting its abbreviated forms and phonetic variants. Perhaps his being the earliest adopter of an ‘intermediate’ form of the language resulted in his reservation about deviating too far from fuṣḥá, since there would not have been a major precedent for using this type of intermediate Arabic. - ! 58 A consideration of al-Hakim, Sibai and Idris shows that writers have at their disposal a rich language with many varieties, shades and levels of meaning, which they attempt to make full use of, in order to simultaneously exploit and highlight the similarities between the forms of the language on one hand, and on the other, to try to blur the lines between them and perhaps eventually erase the boundaries altogether. It is worth noting that al-Hakim, Sibai and Idris were contemporaries, writing at a significant time for Arabic literature, whose collective works have helped to shape the body of work known as Modern Arabic literature, each forging new traditions and leaving an immense literary and linguistic legacy that has influenced subsequent generations of Arabic writers. 3.4.4 Strategic Bivalency Mejdell (2014) identifies a writing style termed strategic bivalency to describe the style of the Egyptian journalist Ibrahim Eissa. Use of strategic bivalency in Arabic can be be likened to the use of ‘language neutral units’ in multilingual texts as discussed above (Sebba, 2012). Like al-Hakim, Eissa makes use of the vast congruent lexicon between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah, as well as graphically identical words, making full use of the ability to ‘hide’ vowel differences in Arabic writing. The result, is an overall style that can be read equally as either fuṣḥá or ‘āmmīyah, or rather, both, which Mejdell views as a border erasure strategy (p. 274-5). Mejdell’s identification of strategic bivalency is similar to Abdel Malek’s identification of Sibai’s use of mid-Standard and low-Standard vocabulary (i.e. vocabulary shared between the two forms, fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah), as a ‘bridge’ between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah. It therefore seems appropriate to view strategic bivalency as a common strategy used in Intermediate Arabic (IA) by literary writers. In addition to strategic bivalency, Mejdell identifies instances of code-switching between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah in Eissa’s writing, indicating further that his style fits under the Intermediate Arabic (IA) umbrella, since code-switching (or ‘borrowing’ in Abdel-Malek’s terms) is another IA feature identified in Sibai’s writing above. A re-examination of the examples Mejdell provides sheds light on further strategies used by Eissa in his writing that can be said to combine other styles and features of Arabic writing, although without the wider text from - ! 59 which the examples are taken it is difficult to make a fully informed decision regarding his overall language use. The first example Mejdell gives (p. 273) is that of his book title, ‫ﻛـﺗﺎﺑـﻲ ﻋـن ﻣـﺑﺎرك‬ ‫( وﻋــــﺻره وﻣــــﺻره‬Kitābī ‘an Mubārak wa-‘asruh wa-Maṣruh, ‘My Book About Mubarak, His Era and His Egypt’), which is given as a linguistically bivalent form. It is correct that the title can be read as either fuṣḥá or ‘āmmīyah, although it rhymes in ‘āmmīyah but not in fuṣḥá. Crucially, Eissa himself pronounced it as ‘āmmīyah in an episode of his television programme where he is seen holding the book and pronouncing the title8 . This indicates that either it is intended as an ‘āmmīyah title, with the bivalency serving to ‘disguise’ this, or that it is truly bivalent in the way that al-Hakim envisioned his third language - that it is intended to be read in fuṣḥá but spoken in ‘āmmīyah. Given the author’s preference for shared forms (vocabulary and structures), it can also be seen as simply a reflection of his preference for using bivalent forms where possible, effectively erasing borders where possible, as Mejdell suggests. The second example (p. 275) is given as the following: ‫ﯾـﺿرب اﻟـﺑﻌض ﻛـﻔﺎ ﺑـﻛف وﯾـﻘول طـﯾب واﺧـرﺗـﮫ اﯾـﮫ؟ اﻟـﻧﺎس ﺗـﻘول )ﻣـش ﻣـﻌﻘول ﺣـﺳﻧﻲ ﯾـﺗﻐﯾر أو ﯾﻣﺷـﻲ أو‬ [(]‫ﯾرﺣل ھو وﻧظﺎﻣﮭﮫ‬ [final bracket added in square brackets as it is present in Mejdell’s transcriptions, but not in the Arabic, which would appear to be a typo] Yaḍrib al-ba‘ḍ kaffan bi-kaff wa-yaqūl ṭayyib wi-akhrituh e:h? Il-nās ti’ūl (mish ma ‘qūl Husnī yitghayyar aw yimshī aw yirhal huwwa wi-niẓāmuh[)], ‘Some people throw their hands up in despair and say “how will it end?” They say “Hosni won’t change or leave, nor will his regime”’ Mejdell firstly divides the sentences into two parts: 8 Seen in an episode of his television programme ‫يسى‬44 4‫يم ع‬44 4‫راه‬44 4‫ع اب‬44 4‫( م‬Ma’ Ibrāhīm ‘īsá, ‘With Ibrahim Eissa’) on the satellite television network OnTV, episode 25/30, aired on 30 November 2014. His pronunciation of the book title appears at 1:07 in the online video available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch? v=l1I4Flzﬁpg&t=380s. - ! 60 ‫ ﯾﺿرب اﻟﺑﻌض ﻛﻔﺎ ﺑﻛف وﯾﻘول طﯾب واﺧرﺗﮫ اﯾﮫ؟‬.1 Yaḍrib al-ba‘ḍ kaffan bi-kaff wa-yaqūl ṭayyib wi-akhrituh e:h?, ‘Some people throw their hands up in despair and say “so how will it end?”’ In this first part, Mejdell offers two alternative readings, in fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah respectively, highlighting each of the underlined elements as the only exclusively fuṣḥá or ‘āmmīyah elements. I would read this part slightly differently: the first part, ‫( ﯾـــﺿرب اﻟـــﺑﻌض ﻛـــﻔﺎ ﺑـــﻛف وﯾـــﻘول‬Yaḍrib al-ba‘ḍ kaffan bi-kaff wa-yaqūl, ‘Some people throw their hands up in despair and say’), I view as being fuṣḥá, followed by a switch to ‘āmmīyah for the ‘quote’ of what people say: ‫( طـﯾب واﺧـرﺗـﮫ اﯾـﮫ؟‬ṭayyib wi-akhrituh e:h?, ‘“so how will it end?”’). Alternatively, the switch point can be seen as the word ‫ﯾــــﻘـول‬ (yaqūl, ‘say’), since in fuṣḥá it could be expected to appear in the plural form yaqūlūn, ‘[they] say’), in which case it would be pronounced wi-yi’ūl (‘and say’). [(]‫ اﻟﻧﺎس ﺗﻘول )ﻣش ﻣﻌﻘول ﺣﺳﻧﻲ ﯾﺗﻐﯾر أو ﯾﻣﺷﻲ أو ﯾرﺣل ھو وﻧظﺎﻣﮭﮫ‬.2 Il-nās ti’ūl (mish ma ‘qūl Husnī yitghayyar aw yimshī aw yirḥal huwwa winiẓāmuh[)], ‘They say “Hosni won’t change or leave, nor will his regime”’ Mejdell offers only a ‘āmmīyah reading for this second part. I would agree and add that the whole sentence reads as fuṣḥá at the beginning with a switch to ‘āmmīyah after ‫( ﯾﻘول‬yaqūl, ‘say’). The third example (p. 275) is given below, as shared lexicon with one ‘āmmīyah and one fuṣḥá element, underlined below: ‫ﻓﺈﻧك راﺣل ﻋن اﻟﺣﻛم ﺑﻌد دورﺗﯾن وﯾﻣﻛن دورة ﻓﻘط‬ Fa’innaka rāḥil ‘an al-ḥukm ba’da dawratayn wa-yumkin dawrah faqaṭ, ‘You will leave power after two terms or maybe just one’ This example can be seen as an epitome of Intermediate Arabic, since it can be read as fuṣḥá with a ‘āmmīyah ‘flavour’ as Abdel-Malek would put it. Although not flagged by Mejdell as such, ‫ ﻓـــﺈﻧـــك‬is clearly a fuṣḥá marker at the beginning, which would lead the reading in the direction of fuṣḥá, confirmed by the fuṣḥá marker ‫( ﻓــﻘط‬faqaṭ, ‘just’) at the end. His use of ‫ﯾــﻣﻛن‬ - ! 61 - (yumkin, ‘maybe’) lends the ‘āmmīyah ‘flavour’ towards the end, as it can be seen to be of the low-Standard group of words identified by AbdelMalek. The fourth example (p. 275) is given as an example of bivalency followed by code-switching to ‘āmmīyah, underlined below: ‫[ راﺟلـ وﻻ‬sic] ‫وھـﻲ ﺣـﻛﻣﺔ ﺗـﻠﯾق ﻓـﻌﻼ ﺑـﺷﻌﺑﻧﺎ اﻟـﻛرﯾـم وﺗـﺿﻌﮭﺎ إﻟـﻰ ﺟـﺎﻧـب درره اﻟـﻣﯾﻣوﻧـﺔ ﻣـن ﻋـﯾﻧﺔ ﺿلـ وﻻ‬ [sic] ‫ﺿل اﻟﺣﯾطﺔ‬ Wa-hīya ḥikmah talīq fi‘lan bi-sha‘binā al-karīm wa-taḍa‘hā ilá gānib durarih al-maymūnah min ‘ayyinat ḍill […] rāgil wa-la ḍill il-ḥe:ṭah, ‘It is a fitting saying for our good nation and one that can be counted amongst its best, such as ‘better to be under the protection of a man than a wall’ I agree with Mejdell that this is a bivalent/intermediate style of language, with a clear switch to the ‘unmodified’ ‘āmmīyah proverb ‫ﺿــل راﺟــل وﻻ ﺿــل ﺣــﯾطﺔ‬ (ḍill rāgil wa-la ḍill ḥe:ṭah, ‘better to be under the protection [lit. ‘shadow’] of a man than a wall’). A fifth example (p. 275-6) is given as an example of flagging (by use of asterisks as per Mejdell) a fuṣḥá variant that has a ‘āmmīyah function, and a switch to ‘āmmīyah at the end (underlined): ‫[ ﻛـﺎن ﻣـﺎﺿـﯾﺎ ﻋـرﯾـﻘﺎ‬sic] ‫أﻛـذوﺑـﺔ أﻧـﻧﺎ ﻣـرﺳـﻠون ﻣـن اﻟـﻌﻧﺎﯾـﺔ اﻹﻟﮭـﯾﺔ ﻟـﻠدﻓـﺎع ﻋـن اﻟـﻌروﺑـﺔ واﻹﺳـﻼم *ﺟـﺎﺋـز* ھـﺎذا‬ ‫[ وﻻ ﺣﺎﺟﺔ‬sic] ‫ﻋظﯾﻣﺎ ﻟﻛﻧﮫ اﻷن‬ Ukdhūbah annanā mursalūn min al-‘ināyah al-ilāhīyah lil-difā‘ ‘an al-‘urūbah wa-al-Islām *gā’iz* hādhā kān māḍīyan ‘arīqan ‘aẓīman lakinnuh al-ān walā hāgah, ‘It is a lie that we are sent from divine care to defend Arabness and Islam. *Maybe* that was an ancient and noble past but now it is nothing’ I would agree that the bivalent/intermediate fuṣḥá form is carried through to the switch to ‘āmmīyah at the end, however I would add a comparison of the use of ‫ ﺟــــﺎﺋــــز‬to the use of the low-Standard ‫ ﯾــــﻣﻛن‬in the third example above, which appears to be characteristic of IA and perhaps idiomatic to the author’s overall style, i.e. inserting low-Standard words to give his - ! 62 language an overall ‘āmmīyah/bivalent feel, thereby shifting the language from fuṣḥá to IA. The sixth and final example (p. 276) shows a switch to ‘āmmīyah and the rare use of a bi+verb: ‫وﻟـو ﻛـﺎن ھـﻧﺎك إﺻـﻼح ﺳـﯾﺎﺳـﻲ ﻣـﺎ ﺗـﻣﻛﻧوا ﻣـن ﺑـﯾﻊ اﻟـﻘطﺎع اﻟـﻌﺎم ﺑـﺄﻧـﺟس اﻷﺛـﻣﺎن وﺑـﻛل اﻟـﻔﺳﺎد … ﺳـﺎﻋـﺗﮭﺎ ﻧـﺑﻘﻰ‬ ‫ﻋﺎرﻓﯾن ﻣﯾن ﺑﯾﺑﯾﻊ إﯾﮫ وﻟﻣﯾن وﻓﯾن‬ Wa-law kān hunāk iṣlāh sīyāsī mā tamakannū min bay‘ al-qitā‘ al-‘āmm biangas al-athmān wa-bi-kull al-fasād… sā’it-ha nibqá ‘arfīn mīn bībī‘ e:h wili-mīn wi-fe:n, ‘And if there were political reform they would not have been able to corruptly sell the public sector at the cheapest (lit. ‘impurest’) price… rather, we would know who sold what to whom and where’ Although Mejdell does not specify where the switch to ‘āmmīyah occurs, I would place it immediately after the ellipsis, which I have found to be a typical feature of code-switching to ‘āmmīyah, i.e. that it is marked by some form of punctuation. In terms of function it also follows the pattern I have identified in this study of making a factual or informative statement in fuṣḥá, followed by a non-statement such as an opinion or emotion, or in this case it appears, a hypothetical wish or desire. It would seem that for all intents and purposes the use of strategic bivalency, i.e. exploitation of the shared lexical item between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah, particularly that of the ‘low-Standard’ variety, coupled with strategic intersentential code-switching from fuṣḥá to ‘āmmīyah (leading to ‘borrowing’ words and phrases from ‘āmmīyah), is a predominant feature of IA as identified in the writing of Eissa by Mejdell, Sibai by Abdel-Malek and Idris by Somekh, as well as that expressed by al-Hakim as his aim for a unified language. These are however, all literary writers, so to what extent IA is an imitable style for the non-literary writer is a question that needs further investigation. The identification of fuṣḥāmmīyah as another style of writing and how it fits in with the writing styles identified so far is discussed below. - ! 63 - 3.4.5 Fuṣḥāmmīyah Fuṣḥāmmīyah is a relatively new term coined by Rosenbaum (2000) to describe an alternating style that is from a mixed/third language, and is not code-switching as there is no ‘base’ language, with apparently random insertions/switches. According to Rosenbaum, writers of this style have admitted it is aimed at “less educated" readers (p. 80) and creating humour is one of the aims of fuṣḥāmmīyah (p. 81). This style has had a mixed reception; some have found it humorous while others were dissatisfied with it and were not convinced it has become a standard way of writing (p. 80). This view echoes the criticism that some resurgent satire has received, as a ‘low brow’ form of literature, which some prefer to call ‫( ﻛـــﺗﺎﺑـــﺔ ﺳـــﺎﺧـــرة‬kitābah sākhirah, ‘satirical writing’), and which has the sole aim of providing humour, as opposed to the more traditional or ‘high brow’ form of satire, ‫( اﻷدب اﻟــــﺳـﺎﺧــــر‬al-‘adab al-sākhir, ‘satire’, lit. ‘satirical literature’), which deals with ‘serious’ subjects with humour (Håland, 2017: 146). Rosenbaum believes this style is a random mix of fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah, with no constraints or base language. This claim is taken and explored further below since it appears to be bold and rather simplistic, while failing to take into account the context and motivations for the use of this style, bringing to mind the claims that mixing in Middle Arabic was a result of errors, and that code-switching in speech is random; claims that have been shown to be inaccurate once studied in more detail. Indeed, upon closer inspection it does seem that Rosenbaum has failed to analyse the style more deeply, and that this writing style is not as random as it appears at first. However, without looking into the full context of the texts quoted it is difficult to make a fully informed decision with regards to this style. An examination of the quoted lines of text therefore, is sufficient in the first instance to raise several points worth highlighting and exploring in more detail: * Firstly, the emphasis on humour in the texts quoted gives a context and motivation for the use of this writing style, where use of ‘āmmīyah, to whichever degree, is expected. * Secondly, the type of publication in which this style is found: newspapers (or magazines or others; it is not always clear in which type of - ! 64 publication the text is found), which tend to used ‘āmmīyah for humour (e.g. cartoons), as well as quotations, letters, headlines (or titles of columns) and lower-brow articles, alongside fuṣḥá for the main articles; and humorous short stories (it has already been established above and will be seen in the next section below that use of ‘āmmīyah or a form of simplified or intermediate Arabic is common in Arabic literature). * Thirdly, the subjects and readership of most the texts seem to be ‘low brow’, aimed at less-educated readers, with a direct correlation between the amount of alternation and the level of the target reader and subject of the text. A re-examination of the quoted texts highlights this below. The use of ‘āmmīyah in targeting less-educated readers is not new and has echoes of Ya‘qūb Ṣannū‘ and ‘Abdallah al-Nadīm’s use of ‘āmmīyah in their publications, Abū Naḍḍārah Zarqā and al-Ustādh respectively. * Fourthly, the alternations themselves appear to show some general patterns. For example the use of hendiadys and parallelism (p. 77) shows that this style serves a purpose of emphasis, as well as a “poetic function” to attract the attention of the reader (p. 78). I add to this the more specific functions of fuṣḥá as the factual, informative form and ‘āmmīyah as the humorous, emotive form, which may shed some light on their use and the motivations for alternating between them below. To demonstrate the randomness of the alternations, Rosenbaum reverses the fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah alternations of one of the quoted texts, believing “there is no difference in acceptability, meaning and style between the two versions” (p. 78). This claim seems woefully simplistic, since the very use of parallelisms indicates a purposeful style with specific motivations behind its use, in addition to the traditional uses and motivations for switching between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah. In Chapters 5 and 6 I argue that context is key when analysing mixed language, which does not seem to be taken into account in Rosenbaum in analysing the alternations and his reversal of them. This therefore merits a closer look in the re-examination below. * Lastly, a point not mentioned in Rosenbaum but found to be significant in taking into account the context of mixing or alternation, is punctuation and the wider typography of the text. This point has been taken into - ! 65 consideration in the analysis below and found to reinforce claims about some of the switch points in the text. Based on these points and on the analysis below, it can be said that fuṣḥāmmīyah may indeed a unique style as Rosenbaum suggests, but I argue that it can also be seen as a natural extension of the literary intermediate style described above, or even a ‘low brow’ version of it. By further extension, the difference between what has been termed intermediate Arabic and fuṣḥāmmīyah in writing, is to some extent comparable to the difference between Badawi’s levels 3 and 4, i.e. ‘high’ and ‘low’ Educated Spoken Arabic. Rosenbaum’s first example is reproduced here, and re-examined below: Text 1 (p. 72): newspaper article titled Khēbit ‘Amal Rakba Gamal by Sakīna al-Sādāt in the column al-Sittāt al-Hilwīn, in the weekly Karikātēr: ‫]…[ وﻣـﺎ ﻓـﻲ ھـذه اﻟـﺧﯾﺑﺔ اﻟـﻘوﯾـﺔ اﻟـﺗﻲ ﻧـﻐﺻت ﻋـﻠﻰ ﺣـﯾﺎﺗـﻲ ﻟـﻌدة اﯾـﺎم؟ ھـﻲ اﻧـﻧﻲ ﻛـﻧت ﻗـد طـﻠﺑت‬ ‫ وﺣـﻘﯾﻘﺔ‬،١٩٩٣ ‫ﻣـن اﻟـﺟﮭﺎز اﻟـﻣرﻛـزي ﻟـﻠﺗﻌﺑﺋﺔ واﻻﺣـﺻﺎء ﺗـﻘرﯾـرا ﻋـن ﻣـواﻟـﯾد ﻣـﺻر ﺧـﻼل ﺳـﻧﺔ‬ ‫ اذ‬،‫اﻻﻣـر ان اﻟـﻧﺎس ﻟـم ﯾـﺗﺎﺧـروا ﻋـﻧﻲ وارﺳـﻠوا اﻟـﺗﻘرﯾـر اﻟـذي زﻋـﻠﻧﻲ واﺣـزﻧـﻧﻲ ﺟـدا ﺟـدا ﺧـﺎﻟـص‬ ‫ ان ﻣـواﻟـﯾد ﻣـﺻر وﺣـﺻوة ﻓـﻲ ﻋـﯾن اﻟـﺣﺳود ﺑـﻠﻐوا ﺑـﺎﻟـﺗﻣﺎم‬- ‫ وﯾـﺎ اﺳـﻔﺎه وﯾـﺎ ﺧـﯾﺑﺗﺎه‬- ‫ﺗـﺑﯾن‬ ‫ ﻣـﻠﯾوﻧـﺎ ورﺑـﻊ ﻣـﻠﯾون طـﻔل!! ﯾـﺎ ﺧـﺑر اﺳـود وﻣـﻧﯾل ﺑﺳـﺗﯾن ﻧـﯾﻠﺔ؟ ﻣـن اﯾـن‬٩٣ ‫واﻟـﻛﻣﺎل ﺧـﻼل ﺳـﻧﺔ‬ ‫ﻧـطﻌم ھـذا اﻟـﻌدد اﻟـﻣﮭول ﻣـن اﻟـﻌﯾﺎل؟ وﻓـﯾن اﻟـﻣدارس اﻟـﺗﻲ ﺗﺳـﺗوﻋـﺑﮭم؟ وﻣـن أﯾـن ﻧـﺎﺗـﻲ ﺑـﺎﻟـﻣﺎل‬ ‫اﻟـﻛﺎﻓـﻲ ﻟـﺑﻧﺎء ﻣﺳـﺗﺷﻔﯾﺎت ﺟـدﯾـدة ﻟـﻌﻼج ﻛـل اﻟـﻌﯾﺎل دول؟ وھـو ﻣـﺎﻓـﯾش ذوق وﻻ اﻧـﺳﺎﻧـﯾﺔ ﯾـﺎ ﻋـﺎﻟـم‬ ‫واﺣـﻧﺎ ﻗـﺎﻋـدﯾـن ﻧـﮭﺎﺗـﻲ وﻧـﻛﺗب وﻧـﻌﻣل ﻧـدوات وﻧـﺎزﻟـﯾن ﺗـوﻋـﯾﺔ وزﻓـت وﻗـطران وﻣـﻔﯾش ﻓـﺎﯾـدة‬ ‫ ﻧـﺣب‬- ‫ وﯾـﺎ ﻧـدﻣـﺎه‬- ‫ ﻟـﻛﻧﻧﺎ اﺻـﺑﺣﻧﺎ‬،‫ اﻟﺳـﺑب ﺑﺳـﯾط ﺟـدا وﻣـﻔﮭوم ﺟـدا‬،‫ﺧـﺎﻟـص ﻓـﻲ ھـذا اﻟـﻛﻼم‬ ‫اﻟـطﻧﺎش وﻋـﻣل ودن ﻣـن طـﯾن وودن ﻣـن ﻋـﺟﯾن وآﺧـر ﺣـﺎﺟـﺔ ﻧـﻌﻣﻠﮭﺎ ﻧـﻘول زي ﺳـﻣﯾر ﻏـﺎﻧـم‬ ‫ ﯾﻌﻧﻲ اﻋﻣل اﯾﮫ؟ اﻣوت ﻧﻔﺳﻲ؟‬..‫ﻓﻲ ﺷﺧﺻﯾﺔ ﻓطوطﺔ‬ […] Wa mā fī hādhihī al-khaybah al-qawīyyah al-latī naghaṣat ’alá hayātī li-‘iddat ayyām? Hiya annanī kunt qad ṭalabt min al-gihāz al-markazī lilta’bi’ah wa-al-iḥṣā’ taqrīran ‘an mawālīd Miṣr khilāl sanat 1993, wa-haqīqat al-amr anna al-nās lam yata’akharū ‘annī wa-arsalū al-taqrīr al-ladhī za‘allanī wa-ahzannanī giddan giddan khāliṣ, idh tabayyan - wa-yā asafāh wa-yā khaybatāh - anna mawalīd Miṣr wa-ḥaṣwah fī ‘ayn alḥasūd balaghū bi-al-timām wa-al-kamāl khilāl sanat 93 milyūnan wa-rub‘ milyūn ṭifl!! Yā khabar iswid wi-minayyil bi-sittīn nīlah? Min ayna nat‘im - ! 66 hādha al-‘addad al-mahūl min al-‘īyāl? Wi-fe:n al-madāris al-latī tastaw’ibuhum? Wa-min ayna na’tī bi-al-māl al-kāfī li-binā’ mustashfayāt gadīdah li-‘ilāg kull il-‘īyāl do:l? Wi-huwwa mafīsh dhuq wa-lā insānīyah yā ‘ālam wi-iḥnā qa’dīn nihātī wi-niktib wi-ni‘mil nadawāt wi-nazlīn taw‘īyah wi-zift wi-qatrān wi-mafīsh faydah khālis fī hādha al-kalām, al-sabab basīt giddan wa-mafhum giddan, lākinanā aṣbahnā wa-yā nadamāh - nuḥibb al-ṭanash wi-‘amal widn min ṭīn wi-widn min ‘agīn wi-ākhir ḥāgah ni‘milhā niqūl zayy Samīr Ghānim fī shakhsīyit Faṭūṭah.. ya‘nī a‘mil e:h? Amawwit nafsī? (‘āmmīyah words highlighted in bold as per original text, underlined words as per italicised ones in the original, are those that belong to both codes. However, at ‘transition points’ it is unclear to which they are intended to belong.) Translation (from Rosenbaum, ibid.) [I have added the bold (‘āmmīyah) and underlining (bivalency) to show where they are found in the text]: [...] And what is this strong frustration which spoiled my life for several days? It is that I asked the Central Authority for Mobilization and Statistics for a report on the newborn babies in Egypt during the year 1993. The truth is that these people did not keep me waiting and sent me the report which grieved and saddened me very very much completely, for it turns out oh!, how sad and disappointing! - that the newborn of Egypt - may they be protected from the evil eye! - have reached all-in-all together during the year 1993 (the number of) a million-and-a-quarter babies!! How awful and bloody unlucky! Whence shall we feed this alarming number of children? And where are the schools that will take them in? Where will we get enough money for building new hospitals to treat all these children? Is there no more good taste and humanitarianism, people, while we keep on writing and having conferences and all kinds of lousy stuff (lit.: "pitch and tar"), and none of this talk is of any use. The reason is very simple and well understood. But we have come - to our great regret! - to love indifference and to pretend not to hear (lit.: "to have one ear made of mud and the other one of dough"), and in the - ! 67 end what we do is say, as Samir Ghanem does in the character of Fattuta15: "What should I do then? Kill myself? It appears as if this text is a complete article, and so a good candidate for reexamination. It is also the text that is later reversed by Rosenbaum, so the comparison will also be re-examined below. It is not clear, however, why certain words were highlighted as ‘āmmīyah and others as bivalent, and the rest left unhighlighted. For example, the words ‫( زﻋـﻠﻧﻲ‬za‘‘alnī, ’grieved’) and ‫‘( ﻋــــﯾـﺎل‬īyāl, ’children’) are highlighted as ‘āmmīyah, but they could be described as technically bivalent, since the verb ‫( زﻋــــل‬za‘al, ’grieved’) and the noun ‫‘( ﻋــــﯾـﺎل‬īyāl, ’children’) are found in fuṣḥá. Their frequent use in ‘āmmīyah gives them the colloquial flavour of the ‘low standard’ variety described above, and use of bivalent terms is a significant finding of mixed and intermediate Arabic writing. For the purposes of reanalysis, I have taken Rosenbaum’s classification of the ‘āmmīyah and bivalent words as it is, and looked more closely at the patterns of and motivations for code-switching. I have also used Rosenbaum’s translation for individual words, rather than providing my own translations. Taking the overall text into consideration, it appears that the writer has used a technique that has been identified in online writing in Chapter 5 below that is of starting the text in fuṣḥá, followed by ‘āmmīyah. We see that in the first two lines, it is clearly fuṣḥá, the first of the underlined words being a reference to the one of the words in the title ‫( اﻟــــﺧــﯾــﺑــﺔ‬al-khaybah, ‘frustration’) which is a shared vocabulary item between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah so its use is not highlighted in bold as a ‘āmmīyah word. The two underlined words in the first line can be said to be of the ‘lowStandard’ group as per Abdel-Malek’s classification above. The use of the two ‘āmmīyah words ‫( زﻋـﻠﻧﻲ‬za‘‘alnī, ’grieved’) and ‫ ﺧـﺎﻟـص‬khāliṣ, ’completely’) highlighted in bold in the third line, interestingly, falls within a section of writing between two commas. This is significant as it clearly separates the first part of the sentence (fuṣḥá), from the second part, which is also fuṣḥá, but contains two ‘āmmīyah words. Another explanation may be that ‫( زﻋــﻠﻧﻲ‬za‘‘alnī, ’grieved’) is a bivalent word, as the verb ‫ زﻋــــل‬is shared between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah. Secondly, if the word - ! 68 ‫( زﻋـﻠﻧﻲ‬za‘‘alnī, ’grieved’) is taken to be ‘āmmīyah it can be said to serve the purpose of hendiadys and parallelism mentioned above, since although it is translated as ‘grieved’ it is used to mean ‘saddened’ in āmmīyah which is the same as the use of ‫( اﺣــــزﻧــــﻧـﻲ‬aḥzananī, ‘saddened’) in fuṣḥá. Its purpose here is to catch the attention of the reader (before it is lost through the use of exclusive fuṣḥá) by adding a sense of humour, since thus far the information has been factual. So we see a turning point here from the factual retelling of events, to the humorous reaction of the author, which naturally lends itself to expression in ‘āmmīyah. The same can be said for the use of ‫( ﺧـــﺎﻟـــص‬khāliṣ, ‘completely’), which is simply a semantic repetition of ‫( ﺟــــدا‬giddan, ‘very’), and the fact that the word ‫( ﺟــــدا‬giddan, ’very’) itself is repeated anyway, exaggerates the author’s sadness and introduces humour to the otherwise serious topic. The two ‘āmmīyah words in this section of the text ‫( زﻋــﻠﻧﻲ‬za‘‘alnī, ’grieved’) and ‫ ﺧــﺎﻟــص‬khālis, ’completely’) can be seen as a ‘soft’ introduction of ‘āmmīyah into the narrative, a way of seamlessly blending it in, rather than an abrupt or random alternation between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah forms. This second sentence can be highlighted as a ‘transitional sentence’ after the predominantly fuṣḥá text preceding it, used to introduce the use of much more ‘āmmīyah in the text that follows. This technique of using a transitional sentence is another that is identified as a feature of IA in Chapter 4 below, and found in online writing as discussed in Chapter 5 below. The third part of the sentence similarly introduces ‘āmmīyah into the otherwise fuṣḥá language softly, and with purpose. The part ‫ﺣــــﺻوة ﻓــــﻲ‬ ‫( ﻋـــﯾن اﻟـــﺣﺳود‬ḥaṣwa f-‘īn il-hasūd, ‘may they be protected from the evil eye’) serves the same two functions as the two ‘āmmīyah words in the section before it; it catches the reader’s attention before highlighting the finding of the high number of births, rather than simply presenting it as a statistic, which is how this part of the sentence can be read if we exclude the ‘āmmīyah saying from it. It also serves another important function in that it takes on the voice of the target reader (i.e. women, mothers), whom the writer is subtly criticising for being part of the problem in the first place. Instead of appearing to attack the high number of births, which could offend women and mothers reading the article, it adopts their viewpoint - ! 69 (that having children is a good thing), to get them on board, before changing the tone to the lament that follows ‫( ﯾــﺎ ﺧــﺑر اﺳــود وﻣــﻧﯾل ﺑﺳــﺗﯾن ﻧــﯾﻠﺔ‬yā khabar iswid wi-mnayyil bi-sittīn nīlah, ‘How awful and bloody unlucky’). It can also be seen as a sarcastic comment, to ridicule the view that so many children could be a good thing - either way it catches the attention of the reader before revealing the statistic. The abrupt switch in tone (from sympathetic with the reader to a lament for the high number of births) is reflected in the language switch to ‘āmmīyah, in a complete, stand-alone sentence. The switch mirrors the switch to the core of the message, from the presentation of the facts to the problem itself, which is the state’s inability to cope with the rapid population growth. What follows are more transitional-style sentences; after getting the reader’s attention the writer poses a series of questions that present the problem in a way that would resonate with the reader. The questions are mostly fuṣḥá with some ‘āmmīyah words, notably ‫( اﻟــــﻌـﯾـﺎل‬il-‘īyāl, ‘the children’), before another noticeable switch to full use of ‘āmmīyah in the second lament that follows. The use of the demonstrative ‫( ھــــذا‬hādha, ‘this’) at the end of the lament appears to be a common technique seen in another example of satirical writing in Håland below, as well as in mixed speech (Mejdell, 2011-12). The section that follows uses what can be identified as an Intermediate form, that could be read as either fuṣḥá or an elevated ‘āmmīyah. In my opinion the whole final section of the article can be seen as ‘āmmīyah, based on the predominance of ‘āmmīyah text identified and highlighted in bold, with insertions of fuṣḥá words to elevate it at certain points. So the overall structure of the article can be seen as fuṣḥá - Intermediate ‘āmmīyah, with the fuṣḥá message at the beginning serving the purpose of presenting the facts of a serious topic at the beginning, followed by a transitional Intermediate midsection whose purpose is to gain the attention of the reader and introduce humour to an otherwise serious topic, followed by a final ‘āmmīyah section that presents the emotions of the writer, a lament or even tirade against the status quo. The use of ‘āmmīyah can also be related back to the target audience of the piece i.e. women, as we have seen in section 2.1.5.4 above that women typically - ! 70 have lower access to education (Bassiouney, 2013) and some writers feel ‘āmmīyah best represents women’s speech, or is the form they are most comfortable reading and understanding. Particularly in the case of this piece, the author is attempting to make a point to presumably less educated women about the need for family planning. In light of this analysis, Rosenbaum’s reversal of fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah terms without changing the meaning of the text can be explained by the hendiadys and parallelism predominant in the text, which does not affect the meaning per se, but I would say adds to the overall effect (emphasis, humour, etc) and therefore style, which has been shown to be generally structured. In terms of acceptability, it has been shown in other studies (Hary, 1996; Parkinson, 1993) that native speakers’ perceptions vary greatly and they may accept or be unsure about hypothetical forms that are presented to them. The fact that the piece may be understood may render it acceptable, but the point of this style is not merely to convey meaning: it is to address a serious issue using humour in a structured and meaningful way, and to simplify the language by infusing fuṣḥá with ‘āmmīyah to make it easier to read, while at the same time elevating the ‘āmmīyah where necessary to mirror Educated Spoken Arabic, giving the overall impression of an informed, yet relatable voice with which to convey a serious message through the use of humour. Further examples from Rosenbaum are similarly challenged and found to be more structured and less random in the style of language used than suggested, as appropriate to the message, readership and genre of the text. It is therefore proposed that the style identified as fuṣḥāmmīyah be viewed within the wider context of Arabic language use, as a ‘lower’ form of Educated Spoken Arabic, or in the context of writing, a lower form of Intermediate Arabic. A more recent example presented as fuṣḥāmmīyah was found in Håland (2017), as an example of an alternating style in prose texts (p. 153-4), but upon closer inspection it appears to follow a similar structure to the one identified above, starting in fuṣḥá and ending in ‘āmmīyah. A review of the study is given in Chapter 6 below. - ! 71 As for the point about equal distribution of fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah in fuṣḥāmmīyah, it is true that there seems to be equal weight lent to both forms in these examples, but given the humorous nature of the examples, and the title of the column given above (al-Sittāt al-Hilwīn), it can be said that the language leans more towards ‘āmmīyah, or that the underlying or dominant form of language is ‘āmmīyah, with switches to/from fuṣḥá and insertions of fuṣḥá words and phrases to ‘elevate’ the overall language, given its written context, which deems writing in ‘pure’ ‘āmmīyah relatively unacceptable, so infusing the ‘āmmīyah with fuṣḥá in this way makes it more acceptable in a written context. The opposite view, that this is a simplified form of fuṣḥá, is also valid, since the writers themselves express a desire to make their writing easier to understand, given that professional writing is usually in fuṣḥá. Perhaps the best way to view this type of language use is through the lens of the average native speaker, who sees the language as one entity, and uses its full repertoire to serve their aims, regardless of the label of fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah. For the purposes of this study, and in order to better define how this language repertoire is used, we will use the terminology of lower-intermediate Arabic, to reflect the balance of fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah within it, as opposed to more of a weight towards fuṣḥá in (literary) intermediate Arabic, as well as the ‘low brow’ nature of its associated genres. 3.5 ‘āmmīyah writing Perhaps one of the most overlooked areas of Arabic language studies is ‘āmmīyah writing, since writing in Arabic is assumed to always be in fuṣḥá, with the usual exception of some literary works. References to ‘āmmīyah writing are mostly limited to mentions in passing, without much further thought or attention to this stye of writing. I make a distinction here between ‘āmmīyah and intermediate writing, as seen above. While intermediate writing is an effective narrowing of the perceived gap between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah, ‘āmmīyah writing is the unfiltered use of the spoken vernacular (structure and lexicon) in writing. Not included in this section are literary works that make use of ‘āmmīyah in the dialogue only; - ! 72 nor those that make use of a mixed style such as having some characters speak in fuṣḥá while others in ‘āmmīyah. There are few systematic studies of ‘āmmīyah writing, but an initial investigation of primary sources written in ‘āmmīyah as well as secondary studies have revealed a far greater breadth and depth to this form of writing than previously thought. The main studies found are: Saīd, Tārīkh al-Da‘wah ilá al-‘āmmīyah (1964) and ‘Abdallah al-Nadīm: Bayna al-fuṣḥá wa-al-‘āmmīyah (1966); Cachia (1967) The Use of the Colloquial in Modern Arabic Literature; and Doss & Davies (2013) al-‘Āmmīyah alMiṣrīyah al-Maktūbah. Interestingly, these studies appear at two moments of resurgence of ‘āmmīyah writing, almost 50 years apart: Saīd and Cachia at the height of modern Arabic literature and its associated experiments with language (see Intermediate Arabic above), and Doss & Davies after the advent of the internet and its associated language revolution (see Social Media and the Arab Spring in Chapter 2 above, and Chapter 5 below). Nowadays, writing in ‘āmmīyah is seen widely in print and online, in a coexistence with more traditional styles of writing in fuṣḥá. This coexistence is in stark contrast to the struggles of the literary writers mentioned above. This relatively newfound harmony is reminiscent of the following eloquent description in Cachia (1967): “For the language that the educated Arab speaks and the language that he writes are both his, and he does not divest himself of any essential of his personality when he uses the one or the other […] It is easier to be flippant in the one, to be articulately lofty in the other; it is possible to be human, wise, sincere, elegant in either.” (Cachia, 1967: 14) The history of ‘āmmīyah writing is well documented by Saīd (1964) and Doss & Davies (2013). While the latter takes a neutral stance regarding the issue of writing in ‘āmmīyah, the former takes a stand against it, declaring the call to adopt ‘āmmīyah in writing to be dangerous and divisive. This difference in attitude can be said to be reflective of the time of writing and the prevalent language attitudes: on one hand, the 1960s was the height - ! 73 of Arab nationalism and the view of the unity of the Arabs being intrinsically tied to the unity of the Arabic language, and the corresponding establishment stance on Arabic writing, which discouraged the use of ‘āmmīyah in writing; on the other hand, post-2011 saw the rise of the age of the internet in Egypt and the associated democratisation of the language and widespread use of ‘āmmīyah in online writing, in addition to rather than instead of fuṣḥá. New and creative writing styles have appeared away from (or perhaps as a counter to) the censorship of the establishment, where predominantly young writers feel they have the freedom to write in whichever way they choose. Examples of ‘āmmīyah writing appear in different genres and across different time periods, including zajal poetry, prose literature, online websites, with some examples of non-Egyptian ‘āmmīyah writing outlined below. 3.5.1 Pre-internet ‘āmmīyah writing Doss & Davies (2013) is a collection of excerpts of ‘āmmīyah writing, from the very few surviving early manuscripts (from the 15th century to the end of the 18th century), to the resurgence in ‘āmmīyah writing in the late 19th century coinciding with the age of the nahḍah, or Arabic renaissance, through to the present age of the internet. The samples cover a range of genres, from prose to drama and poetry, beginning with the satirical writing and poetry of Ya‘qūb Ṣannū’, ‘Abdallah al-Nadīm (both also playwrights) and Bayram al-Tūnisī, who were all political activists and exiled because of their political activism. This highlights an obvious link between humour, political activism and early colloquial writing, which mirrors online youth political activism that is characterised by ‘āmmīyah writing, as separate to the literary realism behind ‘āmmīyah and intermediate writing in modern Arabic literature. The effectiveness of the use of ‘āmmīyah is clear in the popularity of the early writers, which was enough to deem them a threat to the political establishment of the time and lead to their exile. The online youth activists of today have been similarly effective through their use of ‘āmmīyah, to the extent of mobilising the masses in 2011, and the subsequent imprisonment and self-imposed exile of many of them in Egypt today. - ! 74 - 3.5.2 Print & online ‘āmmīyah writing Since the advent of the internet, ‘āmmīyah writing has proliferated online. Examples of this style of online writing are explored in detail in Chapters 5 and 6 below. Significantly, this style of writing has spilled out into the physical world, with many new print publications written in ‘āmmīyah, and some taken directly from their online source, such as the earliest, most well-known example of the blog ‘Ayza Atgawwiz (‘I want to get married’), which started in 2008 and gained such popularity that it was published in print in the same year (reaching its tenth reprint by 20129), and subsequently adapted into a popular Ramadan television series broadcast in 2010. In another well-known example of the interaction of the online and print worlds, is the popular Saudi novel Banāt al-Rīyaḍ10 that is written as a series of emails, in the Saudi dialect. It was translated into English by Penguin Books in 2007. Finally the web-based encyclopaedia Wikipedia Masry11 (Egyptian Arabic Wikipedia) has been written entirely in Egyptian ‘āmmīyah since 2008 and is the first Wikipedia to be written in an Arabic ‘āmmīyah and in 2010, it had nearly 6,000 articles (Panovic, 2010; 94). As of 24 August 2018, it contains 19,271 articles, a growth of more than threefold, showing it has continued to grow since its inception a decade ago. However, it remains much smaller that Wikipedia Arabic written in fuṣḥá since 2003 with 118,870 articles on 15 January 2010 (ibid.), and an increase of around fivefold to 595,066 articles as of 24 August 201812 . 9 Ghādah ‘Abd al-‘Āl. 2012. ‘Ayza atgawwiz. 10th ed. al-Qāhirah: Dār al-Shurūq. 10 Rajā’ ‘Abdallah al-Ṣani’. 2005. Banāt al-Rīyaḍ. Lebanon: [?]. 11 Available at https://arz.wikipedia.org/wiki/‫الصفحه_الرئيسيه‬ 12 Information retrieved on 25 August 2018 from https://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/ ‫ويكيبيديا_العربية‬ - ! 75 - Chapter 4 Proposed Theoretical Framework We have seen above the main theoretical frameworks for Arabic, beginning with Ferguson’s (1959) diglossia, followed by Badawi’s (1973) levels and Rickford’s (1987) continuum concept adapted to Arabic by Hary (1996). We have also seen the strategies employed in speaking, from codeswitching and mixing to translanguaging. With regards to writing, we have seen that code-switching patterns have been found to vary from those of speech, and identified IA as a diverse writing style alongside fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah writing, that employs various techniques to achieve a seamless narrowing of the perceived gap between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah. We have seen that Middle Arabic appears to apply to historical writing, while other forms of mixing (such as fuṣḥāmmīyah and strategic bivalency) are comparable to the techniques we see employed by literary writers in IA, and proposed that the style described as fuṣḥāmmīyah may be viewed more integrally as a lower intermediate style. The contentious subject of ‘āmmīyah writing has been broached and shown to have a long history with parallels drawn between its rise at the turn of the twentieth century that of the twenty-first century, most notably in the political climates of both eras, its link to humour and its aim of reaching and eventually mobilising the masses. In this chapter a new theoretical framework for Arabic writing is proposed, outlining a range of ‘styles’ based on the findings above and applied in the analyses of the following chapters. It aims to draw together the various threads observed in Arabic writing, in a coherent framework that is not exhaustive, but can be added to and adapted as new or existing forms and styles of writing come to light. The focus of this study is Arabic writing produced in Arabic script, so non-Arabic script (such as Romanised or Latinised Arabic, Arabeze, etc) has not been included. An underlying assumption of this framework, is that in the same way that a speaker can move between Badawi’s (1973) levels to suit the sociolinguistic need or situation, a writer may employ the same or different styles between works or within the same work to suit the aims of the text, although it is expected that most texts can be said to be written in one of - ! 76 the overall styles, containing a range of ‘techniques’ to achieve the overall stylistic aims. For example, code-switching can be found in fuṣḥá texts, as well as Intermediate and ‘āmmīyah texts. The degree to which it is employed and the associated patterns, however, may differ to some extent between the writing style of one text compared with another, as we have seen in the previous chapter and will see in the next chapter. Similarly borrowing from fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah as well as foreign languages may be seen across the different writing styles, but the ways in which borrowing is employed can vary between them. Finally, we see in most writing styles that fuṣḥá spelling conventions are followed, even in ‘āmmīyah writing. That is not to say that spelling conventions do not differ, but in many cases they seem to be consistent to a high degree. More importantly, underpinning this framework is the view that the Arabic language is one whole, unified language, with a rich spectrum of forms, structures and features, from which writers are free to choose and make full use of. This view is compatible with the translanguaging model, which views bilingual speakers as having one language system that they continuously search and navigate. Translanguaging views society as forcing individuals to act monolingually, which to a certain degree can be said of Arabic writing; so Arabic writers contain within them one language system, which they continuously search and navigate for the appropriate forms with which to communicate. Crucially, what makes the Arabic language a unified language, is the enormous group of shared vocabulary items and structures between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah styles, i.e. they are part of one and the same whole. Viewing these shared forms as the majority, allows us to focus on the differences as a discrete set of features that is particular to each style. Following this line of thinking, it is worth highlighting these features, in order that they are known as the exception in an otherwise uniform language. The proposed framework is therefore presented in two parts: the first takes a view of fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah in a nuanced way, breaking down the particular aspects of the language in which they differ and explains the degree of difference between them as phonological, lexical and - ! 77 grammatical (morphological and syntactic). I have included many examples in order to document these language features, as well as to highlight the nuance in difference, in order to distinguish the various degrees of difference between them. The second part looks at the writing styles, for which I have kept as much existing terminology as possible, in order for them to be recognisable and to link them to existing concepts, rather than produce racially new ones. The objective of the proposed styles is to frame the body of Arabic literature - past and present, in print and online - as far as possible under one unified framework. 4.1 Summary of variations between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah It is my view that the differences between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah can be grouped into three main categories: phonological, lexical and grammatical (morphological and syntactic). Given that the aim of the proposed framework is to view the language as a whole with regular and predictable variations, which in themselves have varying degrees of difference, the categories of variation are outlined in this section and summarised in Figure 4.1 below: Figure 4.1 Summary variations between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah. Phonological letter, short vowel, morphological, syllabic, and undefined Lexical morphological, preferential/stylistic, foreign/loan words, and undefined Grammatical (morphological and syntactic) pronouns, dual forms, SV-VS order preference, verb conjugations, case and mood inflections, noun and verb negation, number-noun agreement and interrogatives - ! 78 To begin with, Phonological variations are those which describe predictable variations in the pronunciation of particular sounds between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah, in otherwise identical shared words. Next, Lexical variations are those where a different lexical item is used in fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah to describe the same thing. Finally, Grammatical variations are those which exist in the grammatical system, including morphological and syntactic differences. A detailed outline of all three aspects is presented below. 4.1.1 Phonological variation This first category covers the large group of words that are the same in fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah, except for their being pronounced slightly differently in each, with these differences conforming to general rules. This group of words is easily ‘disguised’ in IA as usually fuṣḥá spelling conventions are followed. Thus, in terms of spelling the words appear identical, although they are in fact pronounced differently between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah. This group can be further divided into: expected letter variation, short vowel variation, morphological variation and non-defined variation. 4.1.1.1 Expected letter variation If we look at the Arabic alphabet, we expect and indeed do find it is the same in fuṣḥá and Egyptian ‘āmmīyah, i.e. there are no characters that are exclusive to either form. There are, however, Arab countries in which non-standard letters are used for certain sounds. Thus, in Tunisia, the symbol ‫ ڤ‬is sometimes used to represent dialectal ‘g’, while ‫ ق‬is used to represent the corresponding Standard Arabic ‘q’13. In Moroccan Arabic, ‫ گ‬is used to represent ‘g’14. However, we find in Egyptian ‘āmmīyah that the pronunciation of a specific group of letters varies from that of fuṣḥá, whether in some cases or all. These are: ‫ث ذ‬ ‫ي ء‬/‫ ظ ج ض ق و‬as described below: * Interdentals: ‫ث ذ ظ‬15 13 See: http://www.wikiwand.com/en/Ve_(Arabic_letter) 14 See: http://www.wikiwand.com/en/Gaf 15 Adapted from http://sites.middlebury.edu/arabicsociolinguistics/ﬁles/2013/02/ class5_phonetics_consonants.pdf - ! 79 Egyptian Arabic and most other sedentary dialects lost the interdentals ‫( ث‬th), ‫( ذ‬dh) and ‫( ظ‬ẓ), which have shifted to different sounds in basic and higher-level words as follows: * th has generally shifted to t in basic contexts and to s in contexts that have a fuṣḥá flavour to them; * dh has shifted to d in basic contexts and to z in fuṣḥá contexts; * ẓ has shifted to ḍ in basic contexts and to ẓ in fuṣḥá contexts Table 4.1 Interdental sound shifts in Egyptian ‘āmmīyah Shift sound Arabic letter Basic words Examples Higher level words talɡ ‫( ث‬th) ‫( ت‬t) ‫( س‬s) (‘ice, snow’) sānawīyah (‘secondary’) ‫( ذ‬dh) ‫( د‬d) ‫( ز‬z) ‫( ظ‬ẓ) ‫( ض‬ḍ) ‫( ز‬z) mazhab (‘sect’) ẓulm (‘injustice’) ‫ﺛﻠﺞ‬ talātah (‘three’) ‫ﺛﻼﺛﺔ‬ ‫ﺛﺎﻧوﯾﺔ‬ masalan (‘for example’) ‫ﻣﺛﻼ‬ ‫ﻣذھب‬ dahab (‘gold’) ‫ذھب‬ ُ ‫ظﻠم‬ ḍuhr (‘noon, early afternoon’) ُ ‫ظﮭر‬ * The letter ‫ ج‬in Egypt is normally pronounced as a plosive /g/ (IPA) rather than the voiced postalveolar fricative /ʒ/ (ibid.) in both fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah except in recitations of the Qur’an. /g/ is, in - ! 80 fact, the older pronunciation of ‫ ;ج‬i.e. Egyptian Arabic has preserved something which is older than the pronunciation ‘j’16 . * The letter ‫ ض‬is pronounced ḍ as it is in fuṣḥá, except in some cases where it is pronounced as z in ‘āmmīyah e.g. the pronunciation of ‫( ﺿﺎﺑط‬ḍābit, ‘officer’) as ‫( زاﺑط‬zābit). * The letter ‫ ق‬pronounced often as the glottal stop (hamzah) ‫ ء‬in ‘āmmīyah but not always. Again, the pronunciation with ‘q’ is basically found in words borrowed from Standard Arabic: * ‫’( ﻗــــﺎل‬āl, ‘said’) : where the ‫ ق‬is pronounced as the glottal stop (hamzah) ‫;ء‬ * ‫‘( ﻗــــﺿـﯾـﺔ‬issue’, ‘case/lawsuit’): where pronunciation of ‫ ق‬can alter the meaning of the word - ‫( ﻗــﺿﯾﺔ اﻟــﻣرأة‬qadīyat al-mar’a, ’women’s issue’) is different to ‫( رﻓــﻊ ءﺿــﯾﺔ‬raf‘ ’adīyah, ‘to file a lawsuit’) * ‫ﻗــــﺎﻧــــون‬ (qānūn, ‘law’): where ‫ق‬ is nowadays normally pronounced * The diphthongs ‫ َــﻲ‬/‫( َــو‬ay / aw): where in fuṣḥá the ‫( و‬w) and ‫( ي‬y) consonants are preceded by a fatḥa making aw and ay sounds respectively, they shift to long vowel sounds unique to ‘āmmīyah, represented as the IPA sounds /oː/ and /eː/ as in Table 4.2 below: 16 See: 1. https://www.researchgate.net/proﬁle/Manfred_Woidich/publication/ 254917451_The_gg-question_in_Egyptian_Arabic_revisited/links/ 575ed03208ae9a9c955f7fff/The-g-g-question-in-Egyptian-Arabic-revisited.pdf 2. http://aschmann.net/BibleChronology/ProtoSemiticSoundsInDaughterLanguages.pdf - ! 81 Table 4.2 Diphthong sound shifts in Egyptian ‘āmmīyah Fuṣḥá sound Sound shift in ‘āmmīyah Examples lo:z, lo:zah (‘almonds’, ‘almond’) ḥo:d (‘sink’) mo:t (‘death’) ‫( ـَو‬aw) /o:/ fo:’ (‘above’) to:r (‘bull’) ،‫لوز‬ ‫لوزة‬ mo:z, mo:zah (‘bananas’, ‘banana’) ،‫موز‬ ‫موزة‬ ‫حوض‬ lo:n (‘colour’) ‫لون‬ ‫موت‬ ṣo:t (‘sound, voice’) ‫صوت‬ ‫فوق‬ sho:’ (‘longing’) ‫شوق‬ ‫ثور‬ qo:s (‘bow, arc’) ‫قوس‬ ‫ بوسة‬،‫بوس‬ sho:k, sho:kah (‘thorns’, ‘fork’) ‫ شوكة‬،‫شوك‬ ‫حيل‬ le:l (‘night’) ‫ليل‬ ‫بيت‬ ze:t (‘oil’) ‫زيت‬ ‫صيد‬ de:l (‘tail’) ‫ذيل‬ ‫خير‬ ghe:r (‘other’) ‫غير‬ ‫بيض‬ ghe:ṭ (‘field’) ‫غيط‬ bo:s, bo:sah (‘kissing’, ‘kiss’) ḥe:l (‘strength’) be:t (‘house’) ṣe:d ‫( ـَي‬ay) /:e/ (‘hunting’, ‘fishing’) khe:r (‘goodness’) be:ḍ (‘eggs’) - ! 82 * The hamzah glottal stop ‫ ء‬: when assimilated into the ā or ī vowel ‘chair’ in some cases when: * preceded by a fatḥa and followed by sukūn e.g. ‫( رأس‬ra’s, ‘head’) pronounced as ‫( راس‬rās), similarly ‫( ﻓــــﺄس‬fās, ‘axe’) and ‫( ﻛﺄس‬kās, ‘cup’); * medial in the active participle ‫ ﻓــــﺎﻋــــل‬form e.g. ‫( ﺻــــﺎﺋــــم‬ṣā’im, ‘fasting’) pronounced as ‫( ﺻــﺎﯾــم‬ṣāyim), similarly ‫( طــﺎﺋــر‬ṭāyir, ‘flying’, ‘bird’) and ‫( ﻧﺎﺋم‬nāyim, ‘sleeping’); * on or beside final alif (e.g. ‫( ﺳــــﻣـﺎء‬samā’, ‘sky’) pronounced as ‫( ﺳـــﻣﺎ‬sama) and ‫( ﻣـــﺳﺎء‬masā’, ‘evening’) pronounced as ‫ﻣـــﺳﺎ‬ (masa or misa). Table 4.3 Summary of expected letter variation between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah Letter Pronunciation in fuṣḥá Pronunciation in ‘āmmīyah ‫ث‬ th t/s ‫ج‬ j g ‫ذ‬ dh z ‫ض‬ ḍ z ‫ظ‬ ẓ z ‫ق‬ q ’/q ‫ ـَﻲ‬/ ‫ـَو‬ aw, ay o:, e: (IPA) ‫ء‬ ’ (glottal stop) (assimilated with vowel) 4.1.1.2 Short vowel variation These are words whose letters are orthographically identical, however the difference in pronunciation between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah is in the (unwritten) short vowels, such as: ‫( َﻣــــ َﮭـﻣّـﺔ‬mahammah, ‘task’) and ‫ُــــﮭـﻣّـﺔ‬ ِ ‫ﻣ‬ (muhimmah). This is also, of course, true of a lot of purely fuṣḥá words. - ! 83 4.1.1.3 Morpho-phonological variation This includes a slight variation in pronouncing morphological suffixes or prefixes. A purely phonological variation, it has no grammatical implication i.e. the word order and usage remain the same as in fuṣḥá. Examples include: * the nisba adjective ending ّ‫( ي‬īy) in fuṣḥá pronounced without the shaddah as ‫( ي‬ī) in ‘āmmīyah * the definite article ‫( اﻟـ‬al) pronounced as il in ‘āmmīyah 4.1.1.4 Syllable variation This refers to the vowel dropping tendencies in ‘āmmīyah, such as dropping of the kasrah and shortening of the alif in the feminine singular active particle ‫( ﻓــــﺎﻟــــﻌـﻠـﺔ‬fā‘ilah) form, as in: ‫( ﺳــــﺎﻣــــﻌـﺔ‬sāmi‘ah, hear/s) which is pronounced sam‘ah in ‘āmmīyah; similarly ‫( ﻛــــﺎﻣــــﻠـﺔ‬kamlah, complete) and ‫( ﺷﺎﻣﻠﺔ‬shamlah, comprehensive) 4.1.1.5 Undefined phonological variation Words that do not have an immediately identifiable overarching category for the variation such as the examples in Table 4.4 below: Table 4.4 Examples of undefined phonological variation Meaning in English Word in fuṣḥá Pronunciation in ‘āmmīyah turtle sulaḥfāh ‫ﺳﻠﺣﻔﺎة‬ sulḥifāh ‫ﺳﻠﺣﻔﺔ‬ vehicle ‘arbah ‫ﻋرﺑﺔ‬ ‘arabīyah ‫ﻋرﺑﯾﺔ‬ someone aḥad ‫أﺣد‬ ḥad ‫ﺣد‬ man rajul ‫رﺟل‬ rāgil ‫راﺟل‬ knife sikkīn ‫ﺳﻛﯾن‬ sikkīnah ‫ﺳﻛﯾﻧﺔ‬ rice urz ‫أرز‬ ruz ‫رز‬ spoon mil‘aqah ‫ﻣﻠﻌﻘﺔ‬ ma‘la’ah ‫ﻣﻌﻠﻘﺔ‬ rowing tajdīf ‫ﺗﺟدﯾف‬ ta’dīf ‫ﺗﺄدﯾف‬ morning ṣabāḥ ‫ﺻﺑﺎح‬ ṣubḥ ‫ﺻﺑﺢ‬ - ! 84 - 4.1.2 Lexical variation This second group is where the variation between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah is not limited to a single phonological variation in a word, but varying degrees of change in whole lexical items. This group can be subdivided into morphological variations, preferential/stylistic variations foreign/loan words, and undefined variations: 4.1.2.1 Morphological lexical variation This is where morphologically different lexical items are used in fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah to describe the same thing, but share the same root, as in Table 4.5 below: Table 4.5 Examples of morphological lexical variation Meaning in English Word in fuṣḥá Word in ‘āmmīyah clothes malābis ‫ﻣﻼﺑس‬ libs ‫ﻟﺑس‬ cafe maqhá ‫ﻣﻘﮭﻰ‬ qahwa ‫ﻗﮭوة‬ 4.1.2.2 Preferential/stylistic variation This describes the ‘shared’ group of words between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah that tend to be used in one rather than the other, therefore acquiring either a fuṣḥá or ‘āmmīyah ‘flavour’ as in the examples in Table 4.6 below: Table 4.6 Examples of preferential/stylistic variation Meaning in English Preferred word in Preferred word in fuṣḥá ‘āmmīyah go dhahaba ‫ذھب‬ rāḥ ‫راح‬ want arāda ‫أراد‬ ‘āz ‫ﻋﺎز‬ leave taraka ‫ﺗرك‬ sāb ‫ﺳﺎب‬ drive qāda ‫ﻗﺎد‬ sāq ‫ﺳﺎق‬ - ! 85 4.1.2.3 Foreign or loan words These are commonly-used foreign or loan words in ‘āmmīyah which in some cases have been absorbed into fuṣḥá and in other cases the fuṣḥá has been absorbed into ‘āmmīyah. In most of these cases however, the Arabic form is in fact a neologism, designed to replace the foreign borrowing with a ‘genuine’ Arabic form, as in the examples in Table 4.7 below, including some of the examples from Abdel-Malek (1972): Table 4.7 Examples of foreign words Meaning in English Word in fuṣḥá Word in ‘āmmīyah bank maṣraf ‫ﻣﺻرف‬ bank ‫ﺑﻧك‬ computer ḥāsūb ‫ﺣﺎﺳوب‬ kumbīyūtar ‫ﻛﻣﺑﯾوﺗر‬ trousers sirwāl ‫ﺳروال‬ bantalūn ‫ﺑﻧطﻠون‬ sandwich shatīrah ‫ﺷطﯾرة‬ sandawitsh ‫ﺳﻧدوﺗش‬ hat quba‘ah ‫ﻗﺑﻌﺔ‬ burnīṭah ‫ﺑرﻧﯾطﺔ‬ purple banafsajīy ‫*ﺑﻧﻔﺳﺟﻲ‬ mo:v ‫ﻣوف‬ Mrs ustādhah ‫*أﺳﺗﺎذة‬ mādām ‫ﻣﺎدام‬ Miss ānisah ‫*آﻧﺳﺔ‬ madmuze:l ‫ﻣﺎدﻣوزﯾل‬ bus ḥāfilah ‫ﺣﺎﻓﻠﺔ‬ utubīs ‫أوﺗوﺑﯾس‬ *Examples of fuṣḥá neologisms absorbed into ‘āmmīyah 4.1.2.4 Undefined lexical variation This is the case where different lexical items are used in fuṣḥá and ّ ‘āmmīyah, but neither form is shared with the other, such as (‫ اﻣـرأة؛‬- ‫ﺳـت‬ ‫ ﺣذاء‬- ‫ ﺳﯾﺎرة ؛ ﺟزﻣﺔ‬- ‫)ﻋرﺑﯾﺔ‬ Table 4.8 Examples of undefined lexical variation Meaning in English Word in fuṣḥá Word in ‘āmmīyah woman imra’ah ‫اﻣرأة‬ sitt ‫ﺳت‬ car sayyārah ‫ﺳﯾﺎرة‬ ‘arabīyah ‫ﻋرﺑﯾﺔ‬ shoe(s) ḥidhā’ ‫ﺣذاء‬ gazmah ‫ﺟزﻣﺔ‬ - ! 86 - 4.1.3 Grammatical (morphological and syntactic) variation Perhaps the largest subgroup of differences between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah, it includes (but is not limited to): personal, demonstrative and relative pronouns, dual forms, SV-VS order preference, verb conjugations, case and mood inflections, noun and verb negation, number-noun agreement and interrogatives. 4.1.3.1 Pronouns * Personal pronouns: the number of distinct personal pronouns in fuṣḥá (12) is larger than the number in ‘āmmīyah (8). The 8 overlapping pronouns are largely similar, with some phonetic variations as shown in the table below: Table 4.7 Personal pronouns in fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah Personal pronouns Fuṣḥá ‘āmmīyah ana ‫أﻧﺎ‬ ana ‫أﻧﺎ‬ masculine anta َ َ‫أ‬ ‫ﻧت‬ inta َ ‫ا‬ ‫ِﻧت‬ feminine antī ‫ت‬ ِ ‫أَﻧ‬ intī ‫اِﻧﺗﻲ‬ masculine huwa ‫ھو‬ َ howwa ‫ھوﱠ‬ feminine hiya ‫ھﻲ‬ َ hiyya ‫ھﻲﱠ‬ 2nd person antumā ‫أﻧ ُﺗﻣﺎ‬ - 3rd person humā ‫ھُﻣﺎ‬ - 1st person naḥnu ُ‫َﻧﺣن‬ iḥna ‫اِﺣﻧﺎ‬ masculine antum ‫أﻧ ُﺗم‬ intu ‫ إﻧ ُﺗم‬/ ‫اِﻧﺗو‬ feminine antunna ‫أﻧﺗنﱠ‬ masculine hum ‫ھُم‬ humma ‫ُھﻣّﺎ‬ feminine hunna ‫ھُنﱠ‬ 1st person 2nd person Singular 3rd person Dual 2nd person Plural 3rd person - - ! 87 * Demonstrative pronouns: the ten demonstrative pronouns in fuṣḥá are reduced to three in ‘āmmīyah (‫ دول‬- ‫ دي‬- ‫ )دا‬as shown in Table 4.6 below: Table 4.8 Demonstrative pronouns in fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah Demonstrative pronouns Fuṣḥá this hādhā ‫هذا‬ that dhālika ‫ذلك‬ this hādhihi ‫هذه‬ that tilka َ ‫تلك‬ nominative hādhāni Masculine accusative /genitive ‫ھذان‬ ِ hādhayni َ ‫ﯾن‬ ِ ‫ھذ‬ Masculine Singular Feminine Dual ‘āmmīyah nominative Feminine accusative /genitive these hātāni ‫ھﺎﺗﺎن‬ ِ hātayni ‫ﯾن‬ ِ ‫ھﺎ َﺗ‬ hā’ulā’i ‫ھؤﻻ ِء‬ Plural dā ‫دا‬ dī ‫دي‬ - ‫دول‬ do:l those ulā’ika (‫أوﻟﺋك )أوﻻﺋك‬ َ In terms of agreement in ‘āmmīyah, we see the dual noun taking the plural demonstrative, as in ‫( اﻟﻛﺗﺎﺑﯾن دول‬il-kitābe:n do:l, ’these (pl.) [two] books (dual)’). Additionally, while there is no syntactic difference in the use of the demonstrative pronouns between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah when together with a noun they form a complete equational sentence. However, as a demonstrative-noun phrase their order is reversed. For example: ‘This [is a] book’ ‘This book [is] beautiful’ da kitāb ‫دا ﻛﺗﺎب‬ = hādhā kitāb il-kitāb da gamīl ‫= اﻟﻛﺗﺎب دا ﺟﻣﯾل‬ hādhā alkitāb jamīl ‫ھذا ﻛﺗﺎب‬ ‫ھذا اﻟﻛﺗﺎب‬ ‫ﺟﻣﯾل‬ * Relative pronouns: as with demonstrative pronouns, the number of relative pronouns is greatly reduced in ‘āmmīyah. In fact, there is only one relative pronoun in ‘āmmīyah, compared with nine in fuṣḥá. The grammatical use of the relative pronoun is the same as - ! 88 in fuṣḥá, where it is used in a relative clause with a definite noun, and omitted when the noun is indefinite, as in: ‫= راﺟل ﺑﯾﺷﺗﻐل* ﻓﻲ ﻣﺻﻧﻊ‬ ‫رﺟل ﯾﻌﻣل ﻓﻲ ﻣﺻﻧﻊ‬ ‘A man [who] works in a factory’ ‫اﻟرﺟل اﻟذي ﯾﻌﻣل ﻓﻲ ﻣﺻﻧﻊ = اﻟراﺟل اﻟﻠﻲ ﺑﯾﺷﺗﻐل* ﻓﻲ ﻣﺻﻧﻊ‬ The man who works in a factory’ * The verb ‫ ﺷــــﻐل‬- ‫ ﻋــــﻣل‬is an example of preferential/stylistic lexical variation. For the b+ imperfect verb suffix see case and mood inflections below. 4.1.3.2 Dual forms As seen above, the dual is largely absent in ‘āmmīyah except for dual counted nouns, so no dual pronouns or verb conjugations are used. Dual nouns take the the ‫ ﯾــــن‬ending pronounced as /e:n/ (see Table 4.2 above and Table 4.7 below), without modification for gender or case. 4.1.3.3 SV-VS order preference and agreement In both fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah, both verb-subject or subject-verb order are used, however, in fuṣḥá the preference is V-S order while in ‘āmmīyah the preference is S-V order. Whereas in fuṣḥá the verb in V-S order is singular, in ‘āmmīyah the verb agrees with the subject in number (singular or plural). 4.1.3.4 Verb conjugations The absence of dual pronouns and the third person feminine plural pronouns in ‘āmmīyah naturally results in no verb conjugations for these pronouns in ‘āmmīyah. In imperfect verb conjugation in ‘āmmīyah we see the dropping of the final ‫ ن‬in the second person feminine singular conjugation (‫ ي‬- ‫)ﯾــن‬, and the second and third plural conjugations (‫ وا‬- ‫)ون‬. Perfect verb conjugation is largely similar with some minor variations of internal vowels and omission of final vowels except for the second person feminine singular (ِ‫) َﻓ َﻌﻠت‬. 4.1.3.5 Future tense marker While both fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah use a future tense marker + imperfect verb to indicate future tense, and both use a single letter prefix, in fuṣḥá this single prefix is the letter ‫ ﺳـ‬+ imperfect verb, while in ‘āmmīyah it is the - ! 89 letter ‫ ھـ‬or ‫ ﺣـ‬+ imperfect verb. Additionally, fuṣḥá has another future tense marker, the word ‫ ﺳوف‬+ imperfect verb, which is not used in āmmīyah. 4.1.3.6 Case and mood inflections (indicative, accusative, genitive and jussive) We find these mostly absent in ‘āmmīyah, which can explain to some extent the description of ‘āmmīyah as being a ‘simplified’ form of fuṣḥá. However, we do find the b+ prefix added to ‘āmmīyah imperfect verbs, but not in fuṣḥá. Further, the b+ suffix is dropped in the subjunctive case in ‘āmmīyah. Too numerous to include a full list here, a few examples of case and mood inflections are given in the table below: Table 4.9 Examples of case and mood inflections absent in ‘āmmīyah Ending in fuṣḥá Ending in ‘āmmīyah Case/mood masculine plural ending indicative accusative / subjunctive genitive / jussive ‫ون‬ ‫ﯾن‬ ‫ﯾن‬ indefinite noun ending ٌ (‫)ا‬ definite noun ending ُ َ imperfect verb ending (singular) * imperfect verb ending (plural) ‫َن‬ dual noun ending ‫ان‬ imperfect dual verb ending ‫ان‬ ُ ً ‫ﯾن‬ َ (subjunctive) ٍ (none) ِ (none) (jussive) in some cases dropping of ‫ن‬ ‫َﯾن‬ ‫( ا‬dropping of ‫)ن‬ * Or َ for 2nd person singular feminine ending (‫ﯾن‬ َ ) ** Pronounced as /e:n/ (see Table 4.2 above) ‫َﯾن‬ ْ subjunctive dropping of the bi prefix (none) **‫ﯾن‬ (none) - ! 90 4.1.3.7 Noun and verb negation ‫ َﻟ‬, Nouns, adjectives and adverbs in fuṣḥá are negated with the verb ‫ــــﯾـس‬ َ (laysa, ‘to ‘not’ be') which is conjugated for the 12 personal pronouns, while in ‘āmmīyah nouns, adjectives and adverbs are simply negated with ‫( ﻣـش‬mish, ‘not’). Verbs in fuṣḥá are negated using the negators ‫ ﻟـن‬/ ‫ ﻻ‬/ ‫ ﻟـم‬+ imperfect verb (with the negators carrying the tense: ‫ ﻟــــم‬for the past tense, ‫ ﻻ‬for the present tense, and ‫ ﻟـن‬for the future tense), or ‫ ﻣـﺎ‬+ perfect verb. In ‘āmmīyah the imperfect and future tense verbs are negated using ‫ﻣــــش‬ while the perfect verb is negated by adding the ‫ ﻣــــﺎ‬prefix and ‫ ش‬suffix, along with a ‘helping vowel’ if this results in a 3-consonant cluster, as in: ‫< ﻣﺎ َﻛ َﺗﺑﺗِش‬- ‫َﻛ َﺗﺑت‬ The imperfect verb can also take this form of negation, as in: ‫ ﻣش ﺑﺎﻛﺗب‬/ ‫< ﻣﺎﺑﺎﻛﺗﺑش‬- ‫ﺑﺎﻛﺗب‬ 4.1.3.8 Number-noun agreement While the numbers themselves remain largely similar between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah, with some phonetic variation in ‘āmmīyah; fuṣḥá has notoriously complicated number-noun agreement rules, which are somewhat simplified in ‘āmmīyah. The table below summarises the agreement rules for each, with differences between them highlighted in bold. - ! 91 Table 4.10 Summary number-noun agreement rules for numbers 1-100 Number-noun agreement Number(s) fuṣḥá ‘āmmīyah 1 Singular noun, optional addition of number for emphasis, number agrees with noun number, gender and case Singular noun, optional addition of number for emphasis, number agrees with noun gender 2 Dual noun, optional addition of number for emphasis, number agrees with noun number, gender and case Dual noun, optional addition of number for emphasis 3-10 Number + plural noun, with number reverse-agreement with gender Number + plural noun, with dropping of final ‫ ة‬in the number 11-12: Number + singular noun: unit and ten agreement with gender, noun and number in accusative case 11-19 13-19: Number + singular noun: unit reverse agreement with noun gender, ten agreement with noun gender, number and noun in accusative case 20-99 Number + singular noun: numbers decline for case, nouns in accusative case. Gender agreement/reverse agreement rules apply. 100 Number + singular noun [Number and noun in an iḍāfah with associated pronunciation of ‫ ة‬and noun in genitive case] Number + singular noun Number + singular noun [The number miyyah is pronounced mīt in the iḍāfah] 4.1.3.9 Interrogatives These are different lexical items in fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah, although in many cases it is merely a case of phonological variation, as shown in Table 4.9 below: - ! 92 Table 4.11 Interrogatives in fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah Interrogative Fuṣḥá ‘āmmīyah Who ‫َﻣن‬ ‫ﻣﯾن‬ noun + ‫ﻣﺎ‬ What verb + ‫ﻣﺎذا‬ ‫إﯾﮫ‬ Why ‫ﻟِﻣﺎذا‬ ‫ﻟﯾﮫ‬ Where ‫أﯾن‬ َ ‫ﻓﯾن‬ Where from ‫ﻣِن أﯾن‬ ‫ﻣِﻧﯾن‬ When ‫َﻣﺗﻰ‬ ‫إﻣﺗﻰ‬ How ‫ﻛﯾف‬ ‫إزاي‬ How many ‫َﻛم‬ ‫ﻛﺎم‬ How much (price) ‫ِﺑ َﻛم‬ ‫ِﺑﻛﺎم‬ ‫ھل‬ (none, although ‫ ھل‬is used for emphasis/ elevation) Do/does/did In terms of syntactic variation, interrogatives in fuṣḥá are always placed at the beginning of the question, whereas in ‘āmmīyah the syntax is more flexible and the interrogatives may be placed at the beginning of the question or after the noun, as in ‫‘( ﺳﺎﻣﻲ ﻓﯾن؟‬Sami [is] where?’) for example. This list of differences between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather illustrative of their regularity and depth. We see that even within these differences lie similarities and degrees of variation, highlighting the fact that the forms do in fact belong to one language, derived from and influenced by each other. Additionally, in most cases where forms differ between fuṣḥá and Egyptian ‘āmmīyah, we find these same forms differ between fuṣḥá and other ‘āmmīyāt, on all levels: phonological, lexical and grammatical (morphological and syntactic). Furthermore, as Ferguson (1959b) notes, similarities in forms do exist between the various ‘āmmīyāt, which along with classicising and levelling, (Blanc, 1960), and even hybridisation (Abu-Melhim, 1992), raises to some extent their mutual intelligibility (Ezzat, 1974). In fact, a study of Arabic - ! 93 cross-dialectal conversations (Soliman, 2014) showed that MSA use in cross-dialectal situations has decreased over the last few decades, with more participants than previously observed using more of their local dialect to communicate in cross-dialectal situations, with a high level of mutual intelligibility (ibid.). Although a comparison between the differences found between fuṣḥá and Egyptian ‘āmmīyah and those between fuṣḥá and other ‘āmmīyāt falls outside of the scope of this study, it is nonetheless an interesting point and an area identified for further study. 4.2 The proposed theoretical framework: 7 Arabic writing styles In light of the proposed view of the language as a whole, with identifiable variations of forms, the proposed theoretical framework highlights various writing ‘styles’ that have been observed in use, from the Classical to the Modern. These styles employ various strategies and techniques, including code-switching, borrowing and adherence to or variation from traditional spelling conventions, as appropriate for the aims of the text: 1. Classical Arabic (CA): the dominant pre-nahḍa writing style, characterised by use of Classical lexicon, grammar, morphology and structures, and abundant use of rhyme and repetition. 2. Middle Arabic (MA): also referred to as Literary Mixed Arabic, it is essentially Classical Arabic (CA), with some Spoken Arabic (SA) features, as well as the more intriguing features that belong neither to CA nor SA (Bellem & Smith, 2014), characteristic of pre-modern writing, particularly in the Middle Ages. 3. Modern Standard Arabic (MSA): shaped by the post-nahḍa reforms and modern media, it is characterised by a more terse style than Classical Arabic, and modern scientific, technological and political vocabulary. It may include some ‘borrowings’ from ‘āmmīyah or a foreign language, however these are usually typographically marked by insertion between quotation marks or brackets. Speech may be quoted in ‘āmmīyah, such as in newspaper headlines. 4. Intermediate Arabic (IA): as a literary style, it is a conscious attempt to seamlessly blend fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah lexicon and structures, relying - ! 94 heavily on the shared language between them, particularly (ortho)graphically identical words that may be pronounced differently in spoken fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah. In non-literary use, particularly online, we see an initial, inter-sentential code-switch from fuṣḥá to ‘āmmīyah, often with a ‘transitional’ (bivalent) sentence in-between. It started appearing in the mid-twentieth century with the rise of Modern Arabic Literature. 5. Lower-Intermediate Arabic (LIA): aimed at less-educated readers with a focus on humour in discussing serious as well as everyday topics. It may include a single, initial code-switch from fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah, or employ a series of switches to lower or elevate the language as required. 6. Colloquial Written Arabic (CWA): identifiably colloquial texts that do not aim to hide or blend fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah forms. It may be used to discuss anything from high-brow, political topics to everyday humour. Spelling conventions remain largely close to fuṣḥá. It may include an initial switch from fuṣḥá to ‘āmmīyah, in which case the ‘āmmīyah predominates the text. It may also include fuṣḥá terms to ‘elevate’ the language as required, as has been observed with ESA. 7. Chat-Speak (ChS): a very informal form of colloquial Arabic, used mostly online in chat-style forums and texting. Spelling conventions are more fluid and phonetic, and less bound to fuṣḥá conventions. Within each style, several strategies and techniques can be observed. For example, modern opposition newspapers as we have seen, may contain ‘āmmīyah quotes. Although these are normally typographically marked in some way (usually inserted between brackets), and are therefore highlighted from the rest of the (fuṣḥá) text, it is still nonetheless a strategy employed by the writer/editor - perhaps to provide an air of authenticity to the quote, rather than the ‘translated’ version that otherwise would be provided in fuṣḥá. Similarly, ‘āmmīyah texts may contain elements of fuṣḥá, that have either entered everyday language or for the purposes of ‘elevating’ the language (through register, tone, etc). A marked difference however, is that while fuṣḥá texts will normally highlight use of ‘āmmīyah typographically, in - ! 95 ‘āmmīyah texts, fuṣḥá is used without this highlighting, in a much more seamless way, that seems to harmonise between the two varieties within the same text. The way these styles have been adopted in writing has been shown initially in the previous chapter above, where obvious variations in style between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah have been long observed, but lacking a coherent theoretical framework in which to view them. In addition to Classical and Modern Standard Arabic writing styles and genres, modern Arabic literature can be said to have given rise to the Intermediate style, and most recently the digital age has witnessed a surge in use and popularity of Colloquial Written Arabic. This latter style is explored in a detailed and systematic study of the Facebook page of the influential online activist group at the time of the 2011 uprisings, 6th April Youth Movement, in Chapter 5 below. - ! 96 - Part II Application of proposed theoretical framework on contemporary language use: online and in print - ! 97 - Chapter 5 6th April Youth Movement Facebook page study At the time of popular protests in January 2011 in Egypt that led to the end of President Mubarak’s 30-year reign, they seemed to come out of nowhere. The activities that led to the mass protests went largely unnoticed until people started pouring out onto the streets. The groundwork for these protests, however, was laid for several years prior to 2011. In fact, as per its own Facebook (FB) page, the youth activist group, 6th April Youth Movement, was founded in 2008 and the name 6th April refers to the date of the 2009 textile workers’ strikes in Mahallah, Egypt, which the group supported with protests. The ominous death of Khaled Said in June 2010 led the group to call for protests against police brutality, garnering the support of another popular FB page, We Are All Khaled Said, which was set up after the same incident. After the Tunisian protests of December 2010, the group’s calls for protest intensified, culminating in a wave of protests over the eighteen days between 25 January and 11 February 2011. Much has been said of the role of social media in facilitating communication between the activists and the general public, and the aim of this study is to extend the body of knowledge towards the activists’ language use, which is noticeably different to traditional forms of writing. Since the events of 2011, social media uptake has soared (Spot On Public Relations, 2010) and the language used online is an area ripe for study. Some studies into language use (in Arabic script) have emerged, and the findings of three such studies (Ramsay, 2012; Kosoff, 2014; Håland, 2017) are compared to the findings of this study in Chapter 6 below. 5.1 Methodology This study adopts a qualitative rather than a quantitative approach, analysing the FB posts of the 6th April Youth Movement page over the five-year period from the page’s creation in 2008 through to the protests calling for the removal of then-president Morsi in June 2013. Their FB - ! 98 page, as of 8 October 2013, had 542,220 ‘likes’17 (this figure has more than doubled to 1,388,724 in the five years since18 ). This is equivalent to around 10% of all Facebook traffic from Egypt at the time of the 2011 revolution, as reported by Al Masry Al Youm English Edition19, meaning it has a significant following in the online world. This page, along with the We Are All Khaled Said page, were the catalysts that moved people from the virtual, online world to protest in the streets of the physical world in 2011. The aim is to analyse a range of linguistically-varied posts from the page in order to find an overall pattern for language use. The methodologies of two other studies seem to be relevant to this study: Mazraani’s (1997) study of language variation in Arabic political speech making and Aboelezz’s (2012) study of intertextuality and dialectology in protest messages20 observed in images of signs bearing slogans used in Tahrir Square during the protests of 2011. Mazraani (1997) analyses and compares a total of 55 speeches by three different speakers: the late presidents of: Egypt, Gamal Abdul Nasser; Iraq, Saddam Hussein; and Libya, Muammar Gaddafi. In order to deduce an equivalent volume of data for this study, I have calculated roughly that Mazraani analyses a total of around 10,000 words, or around 3-4,000 words per speaker. Aboelezz (2012) analyses 1,500 protest messages from Tahrir Square in her study of intertextuality. Although it is not clear how much text was involved in each message, there seemed to be as little as one word, irḥal (leave) through to four words, al-shaʻb yurīd isqāt al-nizām (the people want the fall of the regime), to possibly more. This gives roughly an equivalent of the words per speaker in Mazraani (1997). Due to the nature of the data in this study, it was not possible to gather as much data as the 17 Source URL (retrieved on 8 October 2013 at 15:50): https:// www.facebook.com/shabab6april 18 Source URL (retrieved on 5 March 2018 at 19:19): https://www.facebook.com/ shabab6april 19 Source URL (retrieved on 24 March 2011 at 21:08): http:// www.almasryalyoum.com/node/373027 20 Aboelezz, M. 2012. 1001 Images from Tahrir Square: A study of intertextuality and dialogicality in protest messages. BRISMES Annual Conference, London. - ! 99 two studies mentioned, since dealing with a live Facebook page presented technical challenges in the first instance of following, selecting, downloading and storing the posts as data for the study. At the beginning of this study the technological options available were limited and a manual process for selection and analysis of the data was followed, as detailed in the next section below. So to begin with all posts from the group’s FB page were selected and analysed, but as the number, length and frequency of posts increased, it became unfeasible to gather and store all of them. This led to posts being selected on a qualitative, rather than quantitative basis, with linguistically interesting and lengthier posts being selected for further analysis, as well as more popular posts (measured by the number of ‘likes’, comments and ‘shares’) being selected. 5.1.1 Data selection The method for data selection and analysis was manual; at the time the study began technological options for gathering and storing the data were limited. A computational approach for analysing the language was considered but at the time no computational method for analysing and comparing fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah text could be found, and to create one would have been outside of the scope of this study. Aboelezz (2012) was contacted and confirmed she also used manual analysis methods to compare the images in her study. Therefore the FB page was manually monitored over a five-year period and posts were collected, stored and analysed manually. 5.1.2 Data organisation The FB posts used in this study were collected in chronological order and organised following a timeline of prominent events in the group’s activities as follows: 1. Founding of the 6th April Youth Movement Facebook page and initial posts: posts dated August-December 2008 2. Call for protests in support of the Mahallah textile workers’ strike on 6 April 2009 and advertisements of the Movement’s annual conference: posts dated early-late 2009 - 100 ! 3. Death of Khaled Said in June 2010 and subsequent calls for protest: posts dated late 2010 4. Tunisian uprising in December 2010 and intensification of calls for protest: posts dated January-February 2011 5. Presidential elections of July 2012: posts dated January-July 2012 (after the election of the People’s Assembly) 6. Protests calling for the removal of then-president Morsi: posts dated June 2013 (coinciding with the Tamarrod movement) 5.1.3 Data categorisation As the data was collected, it quickly became clear that a distinction could be made between the group’s language use pre- and post-December 2010, the time of the Tunisian uprising, and the awareness and momentum building up after the death of Khaled Said. Much of the earlier posts related to the formalities of setting up the group, its mission, aims, forms of conduct and some relaying of news via photo and video uploads, and the corresponding language use was found to be mainly in the MSA writing style, with some CWA observed mostly in cartoon captions and direct quotes. However, a distinct shift in content and language can be seen after the events of December 2010, when the group’s calls for protests intensified and more emotive language can be seen, with a corresponding increase in the use of CWA-style language. The approach taken towards the categorisation of the data is holistic and contextual, so posts are analysed in their entirety in order to determine the language style of each post as per the proposed theoretical framework outlined in the preceding chapter. In cases where there is mixing between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah, or where shared or ambiguous language is used, the entire post has been analysed in order to take into account the context of the post and its aims, and categorised accordingly, with an accompanying description of the language techniques used within the post such as strategic bivalency and code-switching, including the apparent switch points and motivations for switching. The three levels of difference between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah outlined in the previous chapter were used to consider ambiguous cases. Cases of phonological differences that would be often disguised in writing by omission of short - 101 ! vowels for example, were considered within the context of the whole post and categorised as either MSA, IA or CWA accordingly. Examples of posts in each style and category are given below, with an accompanying analysis of the text to show how a conclusion was reached in each case. The posts themselves were grouped by content into the categories listed in Table 5.1 below. These categories were shown to correspond in many cases to distinct linguistic styles, so they were further divided into MSA and IA/CWA groups, with IA and CWA style posts containing similar content as per the table below. The linguistic features of the posts in each of these categories were analysed further, with the salient findings presented in the next section below. Table 5.1 Data categories grouped by linguistic style and motivations MSA IA/CWA ’Formal’ posts that appear to Cartoons (pre and post December represent the group, its mission 2010) and jokes (post Dec 2010): activities, rules, etc. humorous posts mostly in CWA style Announcements: posts that clarify Appeals: posts appealing to the the group’s position on certain reader to take part in a certain form issues and often address an of action, such as a protest or vote. external audience (critics and Appeals are usually emotive, those hostile to the group, or written in IA or CWA style simply a non-Egyptian/international audience) Knowledge and learning: posts Ideas, thoughts and feelings: that espouse the importance of these are often longer posts of a these few sentences that resemble ‘thought’ pieces or expressions of an idea or emotion, mostly in CWA - 102 ! Photo and video captions (pre- Photo and video December 2010): posts with ‘commentaries’ (December 2010 neutral (i.e. non-emotive) onwards): these posts express a descriptions of attached photos reaction to or analysis of the and videos content of the accompanying photo or video, as opposed to the neutral ‘captions’ we find in pre-December 2010 posts Invitations, opinion polls, Opinion polls and surveys: in surveys and questions to the contrast to pre-December 2010 collective members of the group: written in MSA style, opinion polls invitations are to ‘real’ events, such and surveys start to appear in IA as protests and conferences, and and CWA styles can be seen in this context as ‘formal’ invitations, and the opinion polls, etc. can be seen as neutral, or even ‘scientific’, hence the corresponding use of MSA. Reports and quotes: statements Slogans: short, one-line posts, of events written in a newspaper- written either in CWA or IA (i.e. style MSA as well as direct quotes mixing MSA, CWA, and bivalent from well-known figures forms) 5.2 Findings The first finding of the study is that the frequency and content of the posts vary greatly between periods of high-intensity activity, which correspond directly to periods of ‘real world’ political activity as described in the timeline of events above, and ‘lull’ periods in-between. For example, the number of posts from the founding of the Facebook page up until the death of Khaled Said are relatively small - a total of 65 posts between the page’s founding in August 2008 and the call for protests in December 2010, when the number of posts reached over 600 posts in December 2010 alone. The earlier posts of August 2008-December 2010 were all analysed and categorised, whereas not all of the posts from December - 103 ! 2010 onwards were collected and analysed due to the tenfold increase in the number of posts. In terms of language use, the periods of increased activity were found to be the most linguistically diverse, with the use of MSA alongside an increase in the use of CWA and IA styles. Further, during periods of high intensity on the political scene, e.g. during the 2012 presidential elections, there was a notable increase in activity and more emotive, CWA-style language is used. In relatively quiet periods between two big events, such as the ousting of Mubarak and the subsequent presidential elections, activity on the page is kept up, although the language seems to largely revert back to MSA as the content becomes less urgent and emotive. The language styles that have been identified in the posts are consistent with the proposed theoretical framework. The analysed posts are almost exclusively identifiable as either MSA, CWA or IA, as outlined below, with the small exceptions of quotes from the Quran for example, which were made in the original CA. No use of LIA nor CS was observed. The most salient findings regarding language styles are listed below: * MSA was found to be used predominantly for non-emotive or ‘neutral’ posts, such as photo and video captions pre-December 2010, official announcements, invitations and surveys, all of which do not include emotion towards, or analysis of, the content. * Posts addressed to an external (i.e. non-Egyptian) audience are in MSA, possibly as the ‘lingua franca’ or language of diplomacy between different Arab nations, in this case Egypt and Tunisia. In one case a post was found to contain English, presumably a message to a wider international audience. Such instances of use of English on this FB page were found to be extremely limited and rare. * MSA was also found to be used when addressing critics or more hostile audiences of the page, using the neutral, non-emotive tone of MSA to diffuse rather than inflame any conflict. This use of MSA serves as a polite, non-confrontational way of addressing critics. * In some cases, MSA was found to be used with switches to the colloquial in order to quote direct speech, which tends to be highlighted between quotation marks, as is the case in traditional print media. - 104 ! * Generally speaking, MSA dominates the posts at the initial stage, from the founding of the page in 2008 up until December 2010, and during periods of relative lull in the political scene. * Conversely, colloquial Egyptian Arabic was found to be used more frequently during periods of intense political activity, which is reflected in the emotive content of the posts, including humour and satire, and often reflects the urgency of the posts. * Use of IA strategic bivalency strategy was found in some posts, mainly slogans and emotive appeals, in ‘transitional’ sentences as described below. Perhaps the most significant finding was that code-switching appears fairly regularly in the FB posts. Like code-switching in speaking studies, codeswitching in writing is not random. However, while there is a tendency towards intra-sentential switching in speech, code-switching in writing appears to be inter-sentential. In fact, in cases where code-switching was identified, the switch point could be immediately identified, and one of two distinct code-switching patterns seem to be followed: in the first, the post begins in MSA and is followed by a ‘transitional’ sentence where the language is bivalent (IA), and finally followed by a switch to CWA; in the second, the post also begins in MSA but is followed by a switch directly to CWA. Both of these patterns appear to be consistent with the codeswitching patterns identified in the studies mentioned in Chapter 3 above and Chapter 6 below. The code-switches are found to be consistent with switches in the content of the posts, which reflect clear motivations for switching: from initially informative, non-emotive content, to more emotive or humorous content towards the end of the post. Again, these motivations are consistent with those identified in Chapter 3 above and Chapter 6 below, regarding the use of or switch to colloquial for humour or emotion, and the use of MSA for a more factual, informative, authoritative, official or neutral tone. Insertions of MSA words or text serve to ’elevate‘ the colloquial, a feature observed in IA, LIA and CWA. It is significant that code-switching in this case study appears to be mono-directional, i.e. in one direction only, from MSA to CWA, compared to LIA, in which bi- - 105 ! directional code-switching has been observed after an initial MSA-CWA switch in the text. These findings work to dispel some of the myths around CWA, particularly online, namely, that it is used randomly or due to a lack of knowledge of MSA. Like the findings that Middle Arabic texts contain deliberate mixing of H and L forms, rather than ‘mistakes’ due to a lack of mastery of Classical Arabic (Bellem & Smith, 2014), the findings of this study point towards a deliberate (perhaps subconscious) manipulation of the full spectrum of the Arabic language, continuously choosing a style and applying techniques such as code-switching for maximum rhetorical effect. The ways in which each style is applied are found to be consistent with previous print and literary works, from use of colloquial for humour and emotive content, to use of typographically marked colloquial quotes in otherwise MSA text, to code-switching patterns and use of strategic bivalency. Lastly, the content of the posts was found to directly and consistently correspond to the style of language used, which leads clearly to the motivations for their use. The posts were initially categorised by language style based on observable linguistic features and sub-categorised by content, as detailed in Table 5.1 above. The IA/CWA categories were further refined and the use of IA was found in posts that seemed to contain clearly MSA sentences followed by clearly CWA sentences, where IA seems to be used as a ‘transition’ between a mono directional switch from MSA to CWA, i.e. switches in the other direction, from CWA to MSA, were not observed. IA was also seen in shorter posts employing strategic bivalency. The content of IA posts falls into the following sub-categories, which are shared with CWA: 1. Appeals: these are posts appealing to the reader to take a certain form of action. Appeals are usually emotive, beginning with a factual or informative sentence in MSA, then a transitional sentence in IA before launching into the emotional appeal of the post in CWA. 2. Slogans: these are short, one-liners, appearing either as a stand-alone post, a cartoon caption or at the end of a longer post. The language - 106 ! can be classed as either IA or CWA, as it often employs a mix of CWA and bivalent forms. 3. Jokes: these are humorous posts that use the mono-directional MSAIA-CWA code-switching pattern described above, which is consistent with the use of mono-directional MSA-CWA code-switching in the jokes observed in satirical works in Chapter 3 above. Examples of each language category and content sub-category are provided the the section below. 5.3 Analysis Each post analysed was categorised according to its language use (MSA, IA or CWA) and sub-categorised by its content. Examples of each type of post are provided below, with an accompanying analysis of their language use and a translation into English of their content. The translation is meant to be as close to a literal translation of the Arabic as possible, rather than an idiomatic translation of the posts, with use of as much of the original punctuation and sentence length as possible. 5.3.1 Modern Standard Arabic (MSA) posts Use of MSA can be seen in mainly formal posts, announcements, posts espousing the importance of knowledge and learning, photo and video captions that simply state the content of these rather than stating an opinion about their content, as well as invitations to ‘real’ (as opposed to virtual) events, opinion polls, surveys and questions to the collective audience. MSA posts are found to be written in the third person, often in the style of newspaper headlines and reports. Examples of each of these types of posts are provided below: 5.3.1.1 Formal posts Formal posts introduce the group and outline their mission, activities, rules, etc. For example, the very first post on the group’s FB page appeared in August 2008 (although it relates to an event in June 2008). The content is written mostly in the third person, in the style of a news report and the language, as would be expected in a traditional new report, is mostly MSA. There is one direct quote and the name of a television series written - 107 ! in ‘āmmiyah as evidenced by the spelling of the word ‫( ﺑـــﯾﺿﺎ‬be:ḍa, ’white’), which would in MSA be ‫( ﺑــــﯾـﺿـﺎء‬bayḍā’, ‘white’). There are two expected phonetic variations in this word: the first is the unwritten initial fatḥah vowel, which precedes the yaa’ in the diphthong ay and becomes the long vowel e: in ‘āmmīyah; the second is the final hamzah, which would have been written in MSA but disappears into the long ‘alif sound in ‘āmmīyah. Both ‘āmmīyah occurrences are indicated with typographical marks as expected in the MSA style, so both occurrences appear between quotation marks in the original post and underlined below. There are a further two typographically-marked parts of speech, that appear between brackets in the original post and underlined below. These two parts of speech are not obviously ‘āmmīyah nor, intriguingly, bivalent, so the parentheses here can be seen as simply highlighting additional (nonessential) information in the text, or possibly IA, since they can be seen as shared forms between both fuṣḥa and ‘āmmīyah: Example 5.01 ..‫ | ﻓـﻲ إﻋـﺎدة إﻧـﺗﺎج ﻟﻣﺳـﻠﺳل "اﻟـراﯾـﺔ اﻟـﺑﯾﺿﺎ" ﻟـﻛن ﺗـﻠك اﻟـﻣرة ﻋـﻠﻰ أرض اﻟـواﻗـﻊ‬2008 ‫ﯾـوﻧـﯾو‬ ،‫ ﺧـﻠف ﺣـدﯾـﻘﺔ ﺑـدر‬،‫ أﺑـرﯾـل )وﻛـﺎﻧـوا وﻗـﺗﮭﺎ ﻗـﻠﺔ( اﻟـﻧزول إﻟـﻰ أھـﺎﻟـﻲ ﻋـزﺑـﺔ أﺑـو رﺟـﯾﻠﺔ‬6 ‫ﻗـرر ﺷـﺑﺎب‬ ‫ واﻟﺟـﻠوس ﯾـداً ﺑـﯾد أﻣـﺎم اﻟﺟـراﻓـﺎت واﻟـﻣﻌدات اﻵﻟـﯾﺔ اﻟﻣﺟﮭـزة ﻟﮭـدم‬،‫ ﻟـﻠﺗﺿﺎﻣـن ﻣـﻌﮭم‬،‫ﺑـﻣدﯾـﻧﺔ اﻟﺳـﻼم‬ ‫ ﺑـﻌد أن ﻋـرﻗـﻠت ھـذه‬،‫ وطـرد اﻷھـﺎﻟـﻲ ﻣـﻧﮭﺎ! ﻣـﺎ زﻟـت أذﻛـر‬،‫اﻟـﺑﯾوت واﻟـﻌﺷش وﺗـﺳوﯾـﺗﮭﺎ ﺑـﺎﻷرض‬ ،‫ أﺑـرﯾـل ﺑـﺎﻟـرﺣـﯾل‬6 ‫ ﻋـﻧدﻣـﺎ ھـم ﺷـﺑﺎب‬،‫اﻟﺧـطوة )ﺑـﻔﺿل ﻣـن ﷲ( ﺗـﻧﻔﯾذ ھـدم اﻟـﺑﯾوت وطـرد اﻷھـﺎﻟـﻲ‬ !‫ﻧﺎﺷدھم اﻷھﺎﻟﻲ اﻟﺑﻘﺎء ﺣﺗﻰ ﻻ ﺗﻐ ُدر اﻟﺣﻛوﻣﺔ ﺑﮭم ﺑﻌد أن ﯾرﺣل اﻟﺷﺑﺎب ﻋن اﻟﻣﻧطﻘﺔ‬ ‫ ھـﺎﯾـﻐدروا ﺑـﯾﻧﺎ ﺑـﻌد ﻣـﺎ ﺗـﻣﺷوا" ﺗـﻛررت ھـذه اﻟـﻧداءات وﻧـﺣن ﻧـﻐﺎدر! ﻛـﺎن ﻣـدﻋـﺎة‬،‫"ﻣـﺎﺗـﻣﺷوش‬ ‫ ﻧـظر إﻟـﯾﮭم اﻷھـﺎﻟـﻲ ﻋـﻠﻰ‬،‫ وھـم ﻗـﻠﺔ‬،‫ ﻛـﯾف ان "ﺑـﺿﻊ" ﻣـن اﻟﺷـﺑﺎب‬،‫ﻟـﻺﺳـﺗﻐراب واﻟـدھـﺷﺔ ﻋـﻧدﻧـﺎ‬ ‫أﻧـﮭم ﺳـﻧد وﻗـوة ﻟـﮭم ﺿـد اﻟـظﻠم واﻟـﺗﻧﻛﯾل! رﻏـم أن أھـﺎﻟـﻲ اﻟـﻣﻧطﻘﺔ أﻛـﺛر ﺑـﻛﺛﯾر ﺟـداً ﻋـددﯾـﺎ ً ﻣـن‬ ،‫ ﻻ ﺗـﺧﺷوا اﻟـظﻠم وﻻ ﺗـﺗﻔرﻗـوا‬،‫[ ﻟـﮭم‬sic] ‫ھـؤﻻء اﻟﺷـﺑﺎب! إﻧـﮫ "اﻹﺗـﺣﺎد واﻟﺗﺣـدي" ھـﻛذا ﻗـوﻟـﻧﺎ‬ ‫ اﻟـﺗﻲ‬،‫ اﻟـﻔﻘﯾرة‬،‫ وﺑـﻔﺿل ﷲ ﺑـﻘﻰ أھـﺎﻟـﻲ أﺑـو رﺟـﯾﻠﺔ ﻓـﻲ ﻣـﻧطﻘﺗﮭم اﻟـﺑﺎﺋـﺳﺔ‬..‫وﻧـﺣن ھـﻧﺎ دوﻣـﺎ ً ﻣـﻌﻛم‬ .‫ﺗﻌﺞ ﺑﻛل أﻧواع اﻷﻣراض واﻟﺣﺷرات وﻧﻘص اﻟﻣوارد واﻟﺧدﻣﺎت‬ [Dated August 2008] Yūnyū 2008 | fī i‘ādat intāg li-musalsal “il-rāyah il-be:ḍā” lakin tilka al-marrah ‘alá arḍ al-wāqi‘.. qarrar Shabab 6 Abrīl (wa-kānū waqtuha qillah) al-nuzūl ilá ahālī ‘izbat Abū Rigīlah, khalfa ḥadīqat - 108 ! Badr, bi-madīnat al-Salām, lil-taḍāmun ma‘ahum, wa-al-gulūs yadan bi-yad amāma al-garrāfāt wa-al-mu‘iddāt al-ālīyah almugahhazah li-hadm al-biyūt wa-al-‘ishash [‘ishāsh] wataswīyatihā bil-’arḍ, wa-ṭard al-ahālī minhā! Mā ziltu adhkur, ba‘da an ‘urqilat hādhihī al-khuṭwah (bi-faḍl min Allāh) tanfīdh hadm albīyūt wa-ṭard al-ahālī, ‘indamā hamma Shabāb 6 Abrīl bil-raḥīl, nāshadahum al-ahālī al-baqā’ ḥattá lā taghdur al-ḥukūmah bi-him ba‘da an yarḥal al-shabāb ‘an al-mintaqah! “Matimshūsh, hayughdurū bīnā ba‘d mā timshū” takarrarat hādhihī al-nidā’āt wa-naḥnu nughādir! Kāna mud‘ātan lil-istighrāb wa-aldahshat ‘indanā, kayfa anna “bid‘a" min al-shabāb, wa-hum qillah, nadhara ilayhim al-ahālī ‘alá annahum sanad wa-quwwah la-hum ḍidd al-ẓulm wa-al-tankīl! Raghm anna ahālī al-mintaqah akthar bi-kathīr giddan ‘adadīyan min hā’ulā’i al-shabāb! Innahu “al-ittiḥād wa-al-taḥaddī”. Hākadhā qulnā lahum, lā takhshaw alẓulm wa-lā tatafarraqū, wa-naḥnu hunā dawman ma‘akum.. wabi-faḍl Allah baqīya ahālī Abū Rigīlah fī mintaqatihim al-bā’isah, al-faqīrah, allatī ta‘uggu bi-kull anwā‘ al-amrāḍ wa-al-ḥasharāt wa-naqṣ al-mawārid wa-al-khadamāt. Translation: June 2008 | In a reproduction of the series “The White Flag” but this time in reality.. 6th April Youth decided (and at the time they were very few) to go to the families of the Abu Rigilah Farm, behind Badr park, in the city of Salam, in solidarity with them, and to sit hand in hand in front of the bulldozers and machinery preparing to demolish the houses and homes by razing them to the ground, and evicting their families from them! I still remember, after impeding this step[,] (with God’s grace) the demolition of the houses and eviction of the families, while the 6th April Youth were concerned about leaving, the families implored them to stay so that the government would not betray them after the youth had left the area! “Don’t leave, they will betray us after you leave” These calls were repeated as we were leaving! It was cause for astonishment and amazement for us, how a “few” youths, a small group, were looked upon by the families as if they were a support and strength for them against injustice and torture! Despite the families outnumbering the youth by far! It’s a case of “unity and - 109 ! defiance” is what we told them, do not fear injustice and do no disperse, and we are always here with you.. and with God’s grace the families of Abu Rigilah stayed in their poor, miserable area, which is teeming with every kind of disease and insect, and lacks resources and services. A second example, is the following set of rules laid out by the group in a post and written in MSA, with two borrowed words from English [underlining added in rule 9 and 11 below], and one CWA sentence [underlining added in 11 below] in addition to the slogan at the bottom of the post: Example 5.02 ‫ ﺑرﺟﺎء اﻹﺗﺑﺎع‬- ‫ﺗﻌﻠﯾﻣﺎت ھﺎﻣﺔ‬ ‫ ﻧﺣن ھﻧﺎ ﻋﺎﺋﻠﺔ واﺣدة وﯾﻣﻛن ﻣﻧﺎﻗﺷﺔ أى ﺷﺊ ﻣﻊ إﺣﺗرام ﻛل اﻷﻋﺿﺎء اﻷﺧرﯾن‬-1 ‫ ﻧرﺣب ﺑﺎﻟﻣﺻرﯾﯾن ﻓﻰ ﺷﺗﻰ ﺑﻘﺎع اﻷرض ﺑﻼ أى ﺗﻔرﯾق‬-2 ‫ ﺑرﺟﺎء ﻋدم اﻟﺧوض ﻓﻰ أى ﻣﻧﺎظرات دﯾﻧﯾﺔ أو ﻋرﻗﯾﺔ أو ﻣذھﺑﯾﺔ‬-3 ‫ ﻏﯾر ﻣﺳﻣوح ﺑﺄى ﻧﻘﺎش طﺎﺋﻔﻰ او ﻣﻘﺎرﻧﮫ ﺑﯾن اﻻدﯾﺎن‬-4 ‫ ﻛـل ﻋـﺿو ﻣﺳـﺋول ﻣﺳـﺋوﻟـﯾﺔ ﻛـﺎﻣـﻠﺔ ﻋـن أى ﺻـورة أو ﻓـﯾدﯾـو أو إﻋـﻼن أو أى ﻣـﺣﺗوى أﺧـر ﯾـﺗم‬-5 ‫إﺿﺎﻓﺗﮫ ﻣن طرﻓﮫ‬ ‫ ﻏﯾر ﻣﺳﻣوح ﺑﺎى دﻋﺎﯾﮫ ﺣزﺑﯾﮫ ﻣن اى ﻧوع‬-6 ‫ ﻏﯾر ﻣﺳﻣوح ﺑﺎى ﻣﺟﺎدﻟﮫ ﺑﯾن اﻻﯾدﻟوﺟﯾﺎت ﻹﺛﺑﺎت ﺻﺣﺗﮭﺎ ﻣن ﻋدﻣﮫ‬-7 ‫ ﻏﯾر ﻣﺳﻣوح ﺑﺳب اى ﺗﯾﺎر او ﻓﺻﯾل ﺳﯾﺎﺳﻰ اﯾﺎ ﻛﺎن‬-8 ‫ ﻏـﯾر ﻣـﺳﻣوع ﺑـﻔﺗﺢ اى ﺗـوﺑـﯾﻛﺎت ﺗﺷـﺗﯾت‬...‫ ﻋـﻧد اﻟﺗﺟﮭـﯾز ﻟﺣـﻣﻠﺔ ﻣـﺎ أو ﻣـوﺿـوع ﻣـﺎ أو ﻧـﻘﺎش ﻣـﺎ‬-9 ‫[ ھذا اﻟﮭدف‬sic] ‫ ﻏﯾر ﻣﺳﻣوح ﺑﺎﻟﺧروج ﻋن أداب اﻟﺣوار او اﻟﺧوص ]اﻟﺧوض[ ﻓﻰ ﻣﺳﺎﺋل ﺷﺧﺻﯾﮫ‬-10 ‫ أي ﺣد ھﯾﺧﺎﻟف اﻟﺗﻌﻠﯾﻣﺎت ھﯾﺗم اﻟﻠﻐﺎء ]اﻟﻐﺎء[ ﻋﺿوﯾﺗﮫ ﻣن اﻟﺟروب‬-11 * *[At the bottom of the post appeared the group’s logo with the words]: ‫ ﻣش ﻋﺑد‬... ‫ ﺷﺑﺎب ﺣُر‬... ‫اﻟﺷﺑﺎب اﻟﻠﻰ ﺑﺟد‬ [Dated 2 September 2010] Ta‘līmāt hāmmah - bi-ra-gā’ al-ittibā‘ 1. Naḥnu hunā ‘ā’ilah wāḥidah wa-yumkin munāqashat ayyi shay’ ma’a iḥtirām kull al-a‘ḍā’ al-ākharīn 2. Nuraḥḥib bil-Miṣrīyyīn fī shattá buqā’ al-arḍ bi-lā ayy tafrīq - ! 110 3. Bi-ragā’ ‘adam al-khawḍ fī ayy munāẓarāt dīnīyah aw ‘irqīyah aw madhhabīyah 4. Ghayr masmūḥ bi-’ayy niqāsh ṭā’ifī aw muqāranah bayna aladyān 5. Kull ‘uḍw mas’ūl mas’ūlīyah kāmilah ‘an ayy ṣūrah aw fīdīyū aw i’lān aw ayy muḥtawá ākhar yatimm iḍāfatuh min ṭarafih 6. Ghayr masmūḥ bi-ayy da‘āyah ḥizbīyah min ayy naw’ 7. Ghayr masmūḥ bi-ayy mugādalat bayna al-īdulūjīyāt li-ithbāt ṣiḥḥatihā min ‘adamih 8. Ghayr masmūḥ bi-sabb ayy tayyār aw faṣīl sīyāsī ayyan kān 9. ‘inda al-taghīz li-ḥamlatin mā aw mawḍū’in mā aw niqāshin mā.. ghayr masmūḥ bi-fatḥ ayy tūbīkāt tashtīt hādha al-hadaf 10.Ghayr masmūḥ bi-al-khurūg ‘an ādāb al-ḥiwār aw al-khaw[ḍ] fī masā’il shakhsīyah 11.Ayy ḥad haykhālif il-ta’līmāt haytimm ilghā’ ‘uḍwīyyituh min ilgrūb [Logo] Il-shabāb illī bi-gadd … shabāb ḥurr … mish ‘abd Translation: Important instructions - please follow 1. We here are one family and anything can be discussed with respect for all other members 2. We welcome all Egyptians in all parts of the world without discrimination 3. Please do not get into any religious, racial or sectarian debates 4. Sectarian discussions or comparisons between religions are not allowed 5. Each member is wholly responsible for any photos, videos or advertisements or any other content added by themselves 6. Publicity for any political party is not allowed 7. Ideological debates for the purpose of proving their truth or not are not allowed 8. Insulting any political movement or group is not allowed - 111 ! 9. When preparing a campaign, topic or discussion, starting other topics [threads] that may distract from the aim is not allowed 10. Discussions must be kept civil and non-personal 11. Anyone who breaks these rules will have their membership to the group revoked [Group logo and the words:] True youths.. are free youths.. not slaves This second example is interesting as MSA is dominant throughout and suits the formal, authoritative tone of the post, which effectively sets out the group’s code of conduct. The borrowed word from English in rule 9 ‫ﺗــوﺑــﯾﻛﺎت‬ (tūbīkāt, ’topics’) as well as ‫( اﻟﺟـروب‬il-grūb, ‘the group’) in 11 can be said to be commonly used words online, so their use here is not surprising considering the online context and both words can be said to be a ‘technical’ borrowing, as a feature of online writing. The first instance of CWA, or even mixing between MSA and CWA at number 11 is not random, since although it is numbered in sequence with the other rules set out above it, rather than being another rule, it is in fact another section separate to the list of rules. It sets out the consequence of breaking the rules, i.e. cancellation of the offender’s membership, and therefore the code-switch corresponds to a switch in content from listing the rules to stating the consequence of breaking them. The word ‫( ھــــﯾــﺗــم‬haytimm, equivalent to ‘will have’ in the text) is interesting as it is a hybrid form combining the MSA verb ‫( ﯾــــﺗــم‬yatimmu, equivalent to ‘have’) with the colloquial future marker ‫( ھـ‬ha, ‘will’). This combination is a common feature of code-switching in speaking and is consistent with the focal switch points (in this case a subordinate clause) identified by Eid (1988) above. Its purpose seems to elevate the CWA, which would be fitting in the context of this formal post. The final slogan, which in the original post appears alongside the group’s logo, can be said to be independent of the rest of the text, rather than a continuation or integral part of it, as it is a stock phrase used by the group as one of their slogans, which are usually written in CWA or IA. It can be described as CWA as evidenced by the use of ‫( اﻟﻠﻲ‬illī, ‘who’) and ‫( ﻣش‬mish, ‘not’). - ! 112 - 5.3.1.2 Announcements Below is an example of one of the group’s announcements, in this case addressing those who disagree with the group, in MSA with no borrowing, mixing or code-switching: Example 5.03 ‫ أﺑـرﯾـل إذا ﻟـم ﺗﺳـﺗطﻊ اﻟـﻣﺷﺎرﻛـﺔ ﻓـﻼ ﺗـﺻﺎدر ﻋـﻠﻰ اﻷﺧـرﯾـن ﺣـق‬6 ‫إﻟـﻰ ﻛـل ﻣـن اﺧـﺗﻠف ﻣـﻊ ﺷـﺑﺎب‬ ‫اﻟﻣﺷﺎرﻛﺔ وﻻ ﺗﺑث اﻟﯾﺄس ﻓﻲ ﻧﻔوس ﻣن ﻟم ﯾﯾﺄس وﻣﺎزال ﻟدﯾﮫ اﻷﻣل‬ [Dated 2 April 2009] Ilá kull man ikhtalaf ma’a Shabāb 6 Abrīl idha lam tastaṭi‘ almushārakah fa-lá tuṣādir ‘alá al-ākharīn ḥaqq al-mushārakah walā tabuthth al-ya’s fī nufūs man lam yay’as wa mā zāl ladayhi alamal Translation: To all who may disagree with 6th April Youth, if you cannot participate do not take away the right of participation from others, and do not spread despair to those who have not despaired and who still have hope A second example of MSA use in announcements also addresses an external audience, in this case one that the group is allying itself with. The language of the post is mostly bivalent, but the use of the MSA ‫ﯾــــدا ﺑــــﯾـد‬ (yaddan bi-yadd, ’hand in hand’) lends the whole text towards MSA: Example 5.04 ‫ أﺑرﯾل ﯾداً ﺑﯾد ﻣﻊ ﺷﺑﺎب ﺣﻣﻠﺔ اﻟﺑرادﻋﻲ وﺷﺑﺎب اﻟﺣرﯾﺔ واﻟﻌداﻟﺔ‬6 ‫ﺷﺑﺎب‬ [Dated 26 November 2010] Shabāb 6 Abrīl yaddan bi-yadd ma’a shabāb ḥamlat al-Barad’ī washabāb al-Ḥurīyyah wa-al-‘adālah Translation: 6th April Youth [are] hand in hand with the youth of the Baradei campaign and the youth of Freedom and Justice - ! 113 The following example announces in MSA the end of internal disputes within the group after certain ‘troublemakers’ had been excluded from the group, written in the style of a newspaper headline: Example 5.05 ‫ اﺑرﯾل ﺗﻐﻠق ﺻﻔﺣﺔ اﻟﺧﻼﻓﺎت ﻧﮭﺎﺋﯾﺎ ﺑﻌض ]ﺑﻌد[ ﺧروج ﻣﺛﯾرى اﻟﻣﺷﺎﻛل ﻣن اﻟﺣرﻛﮫ‬6 ‫ﺷﺑﺎب‬ [Dated 17 July 2009] Shabāb 6 Abrīl taghliqu ṣafḥat al-khilāfāt nihā’iyyan ba‘[da] khurūg muthīrī al-mashākil min al-ḥarakah Translation: 6th April Youth ends internal disputes after expelling troublemakers from the movement 5.3.1.3 Knowledge, learning and religion The two examples below illustrate the type of posts that simply encourage the seeking of knowledge and learning as essential for achieving freedom, written in MSA, as well as posts about religion or from religious figures, or quotes from the Quran: Example 5.06 ‫ ﺗﺣرّ ر‬..‫اﻗرأ‬ Iqra' .. taḥarrar Translation: Read.. become free Example 5.07 ‫ ﻓـﻌﻠﯾﻛم ﺑـﺎﻟـﻘراءة واﻟـﺗﻌﻣق ﻓـﻲ ﺑـﺣور اﻟـﻌﻠم‬،‫ اذا ﻛـﻧﺗم ﺗـرﯾـدون اﻟـﻧﮭﺿﺔ ﻓـﻌﻼ‬.. ‫ﯾـﺎ اھـﻠﻲ وﻋﺷـﯾرﺗـﻲ‬ ‫ ﻓﺎﻟﻌﻠم واﻟﻌﻣل اﻟﺟﺎد ھﻣﺎ اﺳﺎس اﻟﻧﮭﺿﺔ‬.. ‫وﻛﻧوز اﻟﻣﻌرﻓﺔ‬ [Dated 26 June 2012] Yā ahlī wa-‘ashīratī … idhā kuntum turīdūna al-nahḍah fi‘lan, fa-‘alaykum bil-qirā’ah wa-al-ta‘ammuq fī buḥūr al-‘ilm wa-kunūz al-ma‘rifah .. fa-al-‘ilm wa-al-‘amal al-gādd huma asās al-nahḍah - ! 114 Translation: My fellow family and clan members… if you want to truly rise up, you must read and delve into the oceans of knowledge and treasures of wisdom… for knowledge and hard work are the foundations for renaissance Example 5.08 ‫ وﻻ ﯾـﺻل أھـل اﻟـدﯾـن إﻟـﻲ اﻟﺳـﯾﺎﺳـﺔ | ﻓـﺿﯾﻠﺔ اﻟﺷـﯾﺦ‬..‫أﺗـﻣﻧﻲ أن ﯾـﺻل اﻟـدﯾـن إﻟـﻲ أھـل اﻟﺳـﯾﺎﺳـﺔ‬ ‫ﻣﺣﻣد ﻣﺗوﻟﻲ اﻟﺷﻌراوي‬ [Dated 22 March 2011] Atamannā an yaṣil al-dīn ilá ahl al-sīyāsah… wa-lā ahl al-dīn ilá alsīyāsah | faḍīlat al-shaykh Muḥammad Mutawallī al-Sha’rāwī Translation: I hope for religion to reach politicians, but not for the people of religion to reach politics | the honourable Sheikh Mohamed Metwally Shaarawy Example 5.09 ‫ ورﺣﻣﺗﻲ وﺳﻌت ﻛل ﺷﻰء‬،‫ﻛن إﻧﺳﺎﻧﺎ ً | ﻗﺎل ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ‬ [Dated 14 December 2011] Kun insānan | qāla ta’ālá, wa-raḥmatī wasi‘at kull shay’ Translation: Be a human [humane] | the Almighty said: ‘my mercy is wide enough to contain everything’ 5.3.1.4 Photo and video captions These captions simply state the content of the accompanying photos and videos, without offering an opinion about the content. This style of caption appears in the group’s pre-December 2010 posts and is written in MSA, after which they start to post commentaries in CWA about the content of the photos and videos instead (see below). In the examples below, the underlined text is a hyperlink to the video, while the rest of the text is a description of the content: Example 5.10 - ! 115 ‫ إﺑرﯾل ﻟﻔﻼﺣﻰ ﺳراﻧدو‬6 ‫ إﺑرﯾل ﻣﻊ ﻓﻼﺣﻰ ﺳراﻧدو ﻣﺳﺎﻧدة ﺷﺑﺎب‬6 ‫ﺷﺑﺎب‬ [Dated 31 August 2008] Shabāb 6 Abrīl ma’ fallāḥī Sarandū Musānadat Shabāb 6 ’Abrīl lifallāḥī Sarandū Translation: 6th April Youth with the farmers of Sarando 6th April Youth supporting the farmers of Sarando Example 5.11 6 ‫ ﯾـوﻟـﯾو وﺗـﻌﺎﻣـل ﺷـﺑﺎب‬23 ‫ ﻣـﺎذا ﺣـدث ﻓـﻰ اﻹﺳـﻛﻧدرﯾـﺔ أزﻣـﺔ إﻋـﺗﻘﺎﻻت ﯾـوم‬- ‫ إﺑـرﯾـل‬6 ‫ﺷـﺑﺎب‬ ‫إﺑرﯾل ﻣﻊ اﻟﻣوﻗف‬ [Dated 2 September 2008] Shabāb 6 Abrīl - mādhā ḥadathā fī al-Iskandarīyah azmat yawm 23 Yūlīyū wa-ta‘āmul Shabāb 6 Abrīl ma‘ al-mawqif Translation: 6th April Youth - What happened in Alexandria The crisis of the 23 July arrests and 6th April Youth’s handling of the situation The following is an example of a video caption, similarly containing a hyperlink followed by a description of the content: Example 5.12 ً‫ اﻟﻌﺎﺷرة ﻣﺳﺎءا‬- 28/06/2008‫ إﺑرﯾل ﺗﻐطﯾﺔ ﻟﻠﻣؤﺗﻣر اﻷول‬6 ‫ﻣؤﺗﻣر ﺷﺑﺎب‬ Mu’tamar Shabāb 6 Abrīl Taghṭīyah lil-mu’tamar al-awwal 28/06/2008 - al-‘āshirah masā’an Translation: 6th April Youth conference coverage of the 1st conference 28/06/2008 - 10pm Below is a caption for photos of an event held as “Students Day”: - ! 116 Example 5.12 ‫ اﻟـﻣﺷﺎرﻛـون )ﺣـرﻛـﺔ‬,‫ﻣـظﺎھـرة ﻓـﻰ ﺟـﺎﻣـﻌﺔ اﻟـﻘﺎھـرة ﻟـﻠﻣطﺎﻟـﺑﺔ ﺑـﺈﺧـراج اﻷﻣـن ﻣـن اﻟﺣـرم اﻟـﺟﺎﻣـﻌﻰ‬ - ‫ راﺑـطﺔ طـﻼب ﺣـزب اﻟـﻌﻣل‬- ‫ راﺑـطﺔ ﺷـﺑﺎب ﺣـزب اﻟـﻌﻣل‬- ‫ ﺣـرﻛـﺔ ﺣـﻘﻰ‬- ‫ إﺑـرﯾـل‬6 ‫ﺷـﺑﺎب‬ [sic] 21 ‫ اﻟﺗﺎرﯾﺦ‬,(‫طﻼب اﻹﺧوان اﻟﻣﺳﻠﻣﯾن‬ [Posted 24 February 2009; event may have taken place on 21 February 2009] Muẓāharah fī gāmi‘at al-Qāhirah lil-muṭālabah bi-ikhrāg al-amn min al-ḥaram al-gāmi’īy, al-mushārikūn (Ḥarakat Shabāb 6 Abrīl Ḥarakat Ḥaqqī - Rābitat Shabāb Ḥizb al-‘amal - Ṭullāb al-’Ikhwān al-Muslimīn), al-tārīkh 21 Translation: A demonstration at Cairo University demanding the removal of security forces from the university campus. Participants: 6th April Youth Movement, My Right Movement, [Egyptian Islamic] Labour Party Youth Association, [Egyptian Islamic] Labour Party Student Association, Muslim Brotherhood Students, 21 [sic] 5.3.1.5 Invitations, opinion polls, surveys and questions to the collective members of the group The group’s invitations are to local, ‘real world’ (as opposed to virtual) events. The first example below is of one of the group’s invitations, to the closing session of the group’s annual conference in Cairo: Example 5.13 ‫ ﻧـوﻓـﻣﺑر ﻟـﺣﺿور اﻟﺟـﻠﺳﺔ اﻟـﺧﺗﺎﻣـﯾﺔ ﻟـﻣؤﺗـﻣرھـﺎ اﻟـﻘﻠﺔ اﻟـﻣﻧدﺳـﺔ‬2 ‫ اﺑـرﯾـل ﻏـدا‬6 ‫ﺗـدﻋـوﻛـم ﺣـرﻛـﺔ ﺷـﺑﺎب‬ www.6april.org ‫ ﻟﻣزﯾد ﻣن اﻟﻣﻌﻠوﻣﺎت‬.... ‫ﻓﻲ ﺣزب اﻟﺟﺑﮭﺔ اﻟدﯾﻣﻘراطﻲ ﺑﺎﻟﻣﮭﻧدﺳﯾن‬ [Dated 1 November 2009] Tad‘ūkum ḥarakat Shabāb 6 Abrīl ghadan 2 Nūfimbir li-ḥudūr algalsah al-khitāmīyyah li-mu’tamariha al-Qillah al-Mundassah fī Ḥizb al-Gabhah al-Dīmuqrātī bil-Muhandisīn … li-mazīd min alma‘lūmāt www.6april.org Translation: 6 April Youth Movement invites you tomorrow 6 November to attend the closing session of its conference ‘The - ! 117 Minority of Infiltrators’ at the Democratic Front Party in Muhandiseen… for more information www.6april.org Below are further examples of invitations to various events, in MSA: Example 5.14 :‫ ﻛﻠﻣﺎت اﻟﺷﺧﺻﯾﺎت اﻟﻌﺎﻣﺔ و اﻟﺳﯾﺎﺳﯾﺔ ﻟﻠﻣؤﺗﻣر‬- ‫ ﻓﻌﺎﻟﯾﺎت اﻟﯾوم اﻟﺛﺎﻧﻰ‬- ‫ﻣؤﺗﻣر اﻟﻘﻠﺔ اﻟﻣﻧدﺳﺔ‬ ‫ﻋـﻼء اﻷﺳـواﻧـﻰ‬/‫ أ‬- ‫ اﻟـﻧﺎﺋـب ﺣـﻣدﯾـن ﺻـﺑﺎﺣـﻰ‬- ‫ﻛـﻣﺎل أﺑـو ﻋـﯾطﺔ‬/‫ أ‬- ‫ ﺑـﺛﯾﻧﺔ ﻛـﺎﻣـل‬/‫ اﻹﻋـﻼﻣـﯾﺔ‬[…] [Dated 31 October 2008] Mu’tamar al-Qillah al-Mundassah - fa‘ālīyāt al-yawm al-thānī kalimāt al-shakhṣīyāt al-‘āmmah wa-al-sīyāsīyah lil-mu’tamar: - al-i‘lāmīyah / Buthaynah Kāmil / [al-]U[stādh]/Kamāl Abū ‘atīyah al-Nā’ib Ḥamdayn Ṣabbāḥī - [al-]U[stādh] ‘alā’ al-Aswānī […] Translation: The Minority of Infiltrators Conference - Effectiveness of the second day - talks by public and political figures to the conference: - the journalist Buthayna Kamil, Mr Kamal Abu Atiyah, the representative Hamdeen Sabbahi [and] Mr Alaa Al-Aswany Example 5.15 ‫ ھﻧﺎ اﻟﻘﺎھره و ﻟﯾس اﻟﺟﺎﺑون‬.. ‫ اﺑرﯾل‬6 ‫ ﺗﺣت رﻋﺎﯾﺔ ﺷﺑﺎب‬..‫ﻗرﯾﺑﺎ ً ﻣؤﺗﻣر اﻟﻘﻠﮫ اﻟﻣﻧدﺳﮫ‬ Qariban mu’tamar al-Qillah al-Mondassah .. taḥta ri‘āyat Shabāb 6 Abriī .. hunā al-Qāhirah wa-laysa al-Gābūn Translation: Coming soon The Minority of Infiltrators Conference… sponsored by 6 April Youth… here is Cairo and not Gabon Example 5.16 ‫[ ﻣـن ﺳـﯾﺎدة اﻟـﺳﻔﯾر إﺑـراھـﯾم‬sic] ‫ﺑـدﻋـوى‬..‫ﻏـداً أﻣـﺎم ﻧـﻘﺎﺑـﺔ اﻟـﺻﺣﻔﯾﯾن ﻓـﻰ ﺗـﻣﺎم اﻟـﺳﺎدﺳـﺔ و اﻟـﻧﺻف‬ ‫ وﻗﻔﺔ إﺣﺗﺟﺎج‬..‫ إﺑرﯾل و ﺑﻣﺷﺎرﻛﺔ اﻟﻘوى اﻟوطﻧﯾﺔ‬6 ‫ﯾﺳرى و ﺣرﻛﺔ ﺷﺑﺎب‬ - ! 118 Ghadan amāma niqābat al-ṣaḥafīyyīn fī tamām al-sādisah wa-alniṣf.. bi-da‘wá min sīyādat al-safīr Ibrāhim Yusrī wa-Ḥarakat Shabāb 6 Abrīl wa-bi-mushārakat al-quwwá al-waṭanīyyah.. waqfat iḥtigāg Translation: Tomorrow in front of the journalism syndicate at half past six o’clock… by invitation from the ambassador Ibrahim Yousry and the 6 April Youth Movement with the participation of national powers… a protest stand The two examples below show how the group conduct opinion polls and surveys, and pose questions to their audience. The choice of MSA reflects the formal, official tone of the questions, given that the responses gathered inform the group’s plans and policies. MSA is the expected language choice for scientific study, including opinion polls and surveys. The first of the two examples is simply MSA, while the second is split into two parts, in terms of both content and language, as shown below: Example 5.17 ‫[ اﻟـﺗﻌذﯾـب‬sic] ‫ إﻧـﺗﺻﺎراً ﻟـﻠﺿﺣﺎﯾـﺎ‬,‫ ﻧـوﻓـﻣﺑر اﻟـﻘﺎدم‬26 ‫ھـل ﺗـواﻓـق ﻋـﻠﻰ ﺗـﻧظﯾم ﻋـﻣل إﺣـﺗﺟﺎﺟـﻲ ﯾـوم‬ ‫ ﻣن ﻻ ﺻوت ﻟﮫ؟‬,‫ﻓﻲ ﻣﺻر؟ ﺗواﻓق أن ﺗﻛون ﺻوت‬ [Posted 21 November 2010] Hal tuwāfiq ‘alá tanẓīm ‘amal iḥtigāgī yawm 26 Nūfimbir al-qādim, intiṣāran li-ḍahāyā al-ta‘dhīb fī Miṣr? Tuwāfiq an takūn ṣawt, man lā ṣawt lah? Translation: Do you agree with organising a form of protest on 26 November, for the victims of torture in Egypt? Do you agree to be a voice, for those without a voice? Example 5.18 ‫ ﯾﺎرﯾت ﻛل اﻟﻠﻲ ﯾﺷوف اﻟﺳﺗﺎﺗوس ده ﯾدّﯾﻧﺎ رأﯾﮫ ﻷﻧﮫ ﻣﮭم ﻟﻠﻐﺎﯾﺔ‬..‫ﺷﺑﺎب‬ ‫ھلـ ﺗﻌـﻠن رﻓﺿـك ﻟﻧـﺗﺎﺋﺞـ إﻧﺗـﺧﺎﺑﺎـت ﻣﺟﻠـس اﻟﺷـﻌب؟ وأن ﻣﺟﻠـس اﻟﺷـﻌب اﻟﺟدـﯾدـ ﻏﯾـر ﺷرـﻋﻲـ وﻻ‬ ‫ رﺟﺎء اﻟﺗﺻوﯾت ﺑﻛﺛﺎﻓﺔ اﻵن‬..‫ﯾُﻣﺛﻠﻧﺎ؟ ﻧﻌم أم ﻷ‬ [Posted 28 November 2010; underlining added] - ! 119 - Shabāb.. yāre:t kull illī yishūf il-stātūs dah yiddīnā ra’yuh l-innuh muhimm lil-ghāyah Hal tu‘lin rafḍuka li-natā’ig intikhābāt maglis al-sha‘b? Wa-anna maglis al-sha‘b al-gadīdi ghayr shar‘ī wa-lā yumaththilunā? Na‘am am la’ .. rajā’ al-taṣwīt bi-kathāfah al-ān Translation: Guys… we wish for everyone who sees this status to give us their opinion because it’s of the upmost importance Do you declare your rejection of the parliamentary election results? And that the new parliament is unlawful and does not represent us? Yes or no… please vote in large numbers now The first part of the second example is an appeal to the readers to respond to the post and is written in CWA, which is consistent with the style of the group’s appeals, followed by the actual questions posed to the audience in MSA, to which they are seeking a response. The use of the MSA word ‫( ﻟـــﻠﻐﺎﯾـــﺔ‬lil-ghāyah, ‘of the utmost’) at the end of the CWA appeal raises the seriousness of the tone of the appeal and signals the switch to MSA in the questions that follow. 5.3.1.6 Reports and quotes Reports in this category such as Example 5.21 below, are written in the style of news reports or official witness statements. This style is comparable to the official report style found in activist blogs as discussed in the following chapter. Quotes are from public figures, often quoted from newspaper headlines/articles. Example 5.19 ‫ ﻣـﺻر ﻟـم ﺗﻌﺟـز ﺣـﺗﻰ ﺗـﻘﺑل اﺳـﺗﺛﻣﺎرً ا‬: ‫ﺳـﻣﯾر رﺿـوان "وزﯾــــــــــــــــر اﻟـﺷﻌــــــــــــب" ﯾـﻘول‬ ‫إﺳراﺋﯾﻠﯾًﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ أرﺿﮭﺎ ﻣﮭﻣﺎ ﻛﺎن اﻟﻌﺎﺋد اﻻﻗﺗﺻﺎدى | ﺗﺣﯾﺎ اﻟﺛورة‬ [Dated 16 April 2011] Samīr Raḍwān “Wazīr al-Sha‘b” yaqūl : Miṣr lam ta‘jaz ḥattá taqbal istithmāran Isrā’īlīyyan ‘alá arḍihā mahmā kān al-‘ā’id al-iqtiṣādī | taḥyā al-thawrah - 120 ! Translation: Samir Radwan “Minister of the People” says” Egypt is not weak until it accepts Israeli investment on its land, whatever the economic return may be | long live the revolution Example 5.20 ‫ ﻻ ﯾـﻌﯾﺷون ﻓـﻰ‬،‫ ﻟـﻛﻧﮭم‬..‫ أﻧـﮭم ﯾـﻌﯾﺷون ﻓـﻰ ﻣـﻛﺎن واﺣـد‬،‫ﺟـﻼل ﻋـﺎﻣـر | ﻣـﺷﻛﻠﺔ اﻟـﻣﺻرﯾـﯾن اﻟـﻛﺑرى‬ ‫زﻣﺎن واﺣد‬ [Dated 1 December 1 2011] Jalāl ‘āmir | mushkilat al-Miṣrīyīn al-Kubrá, annahum ya‘īshuna fī makān wāḥid… lākinnahum lā ya‘īshūna fī zamān wāḥid Translation: Galal Amer | Egyptians’ biggest problem is that they live in one place, but not in one time Example 5.21 ‫ ﻓـوق ﻛـوﺑـري أﻛـﺗوﺑـر أﻋـﻠﻰ‬135 ‫ ل ج أ‬:‫اﻵن ﺳـﯾﺎرة ﻛـﺎدﯾـﻼك ﺳـﻛﻠﯾد ﻓـور ﺑـﺎى ﻓـور ﺳـوداء ﻧـﻣرة‬ ‫ﻣـﯾدان ﻋـﺑد اﻟـﻣﻧﻌم رﯾـﺎض ﺗـﻘوم ﺑـﺗوزﯾـﻊ ﻣـﺑﺎﻟـﻎ ﻣـﺎﻟـﯾﺔ ﻋـﻠﻰ اﻟـﺑﻠطﺟﯾﺔ اﻟـﻣﺗﺄھـﺑﯾن ﻹﻗـﺗﺣﺎم ﻣـﯾدان‬ ‫ رﺟﺎء اﻟﻧﺷر ﻓﻲ ﻛل ﻣﻛﺎن‬..‫اﻟﺗﺣرﯾر ﻓﺟر اﻟﯾوم‬ [Dated 3 February 2011] Al-ān sayyārah Kadīlāk Sklīd fūr bāy fūr sawdā’ nimrah: 135 a j fawqa kūbrī Aktūbar a‘lá maydān ‘abd al-Mon‘im Rīyāḍ taqūm bitawzī‘ mabāligh mālīyyah ‘alá al-balṭagīyah al-muta’ahibīn liiqtiḥām Maydān al-Taḥrīr fajr al-yawm… rajā’ al-nashr fī kull makān Translation: A black Cadillac Escalade 4x4 number plate 135 A J is now on the 6th October Bridge above Abdel Moneim Riad Square. It is distributing money to thugs preparing to invade Tahrir Square at dawn today… please share widely 5.3.2 Colloquial Written Arabic (CWA) and Intermediate Arabic (IA) posts Posts written in colloquial on the group’s FB page are those which contain cartoons, slogans, appeals, thoughts and emotions, and commentaries accompanying photos and videos, examples of which are included below: - 121 ! 5.3.2.1 Cartoons, jokes and satire The text in the group’s cartoon posts is consistently colloquial, which is comparable to the use of colloquial in newspaper cartoons. Jokes and satire tend to include features of IA such as code-switching between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah, at times making use of a ‘transitional’ IA sentence in between. Below is an example of a cartoon post with a simple caption: Example 5.22 ‫ﻛﺎن ﻓﻲ وﺧﻠص‬ [Dated 30 August 2008] Kān fī wi-khiliṣ Translation: There was some but now it’s finished Another post with a photo of Mubarak had the following humorous caption in CWA, including use of the underlined word ‫( رﯾــــس‬rayyis, ’president’) using the phonetically ‘āmmīyah spelling as opposed to the fuṣḥá spelling ‫رﺋــــﯾـس‬ (ra’īs, ‘president’): - 122 ! Example 5.23 ‫ اﻟرﯾس ﻓﻲ ﻟﺣظﺔ ﺷﻣوخ وإﻧﺷﻣﺎخ‬..‫ﺣد ﯾﻌرف ﯾﺷﻣﺦ اﻟﺷﻣﺧﺔ دي ﯾﺎ وﻻد‬ [Dated December 12 2010] Ḥadd yi‘raf yishmakh il-shamkhah dī ya wilād.. il-rayyis fī laḥẓit shumūkh wi-inshimākh Translation: Anyone know how to look this arrogant guys… the President [Mubarak] in a moment of arrogance An example of satire on the group’s page is a series of posts mocking then president Mubarak, all ending with the word ‫( اﻟـــﻣوﻣـــﯾــــــــــــﺎء‬al-mūmīā’, ‘the mummy’) in reference to Mubarak: his age, his 30 years in office and his status as an undisputed ruler likening him to a ‘pharaoh’ of Egypt. The example below highlights the difference between popular opinion and the presidency’s foreign policy, particularly towards Israel: Example 5.24 ‫ ﺳﻧﺔ‬30 ‫ وﺣﻛم إﺳراﺋﯾل‬,‫ﯾﺎ رﯾت اﻟرﯾّس ﻛﺎن ﺿرﺑﻧﺎ إﺣﻧﺎ اﻟﺿرﺑﺔ اﻟﺟوﯾﺔ‬ ‫ ﺳور ﻋﺎزل ﻹﺳراﺋﯾل‬,‫ طﯾّﺎرات إطﻔﺎء ﺣراﯾق ﻹﺳراﺋﯾل‬,‫اﻟﻐﺎز ﻹﺳراﺋﯾل‬ ‫ ﻣُﻔﺟّ را ﺛورة اﻟﺗدﻋﯾم واﻟﺗطوﯾر واﻟﺣﻣﺎﯾﺔ ﻹﺳراﺋﯾل اﻹرھﺎﺑﯾﺔ‬,‫ﺗﺣﯾﺔ ﻟﻠرﺋﯾس ووﻟده‬ ‫اﻟﻣوﻣﯾــــــــــــﺎء‬ [Dated December 14 2010] Yā re:t il-rayyis kān ḍarabna iḥna il-ḍarbah il-gawwīyah, wi-ḥakam Isrā’īl 30 sanah Il-ghāz li-Isrā’īl, ṭayyārāt iṭfā’ ḥarā’īq li-Isrā’īl, sūr ‘āzil li-Isrā’īl Taḥīyah lil-ra’īs wa-waladuh, mufaggiran thawrat al-tad‘īm wa-altaṭwīr wa-al-ḥimāyah li-Isrā’īl al-irhābīyah Al-mūmyā’ Translation: We wish the president had struck us with the air strike, and ruled Israel for 30 years Gas for Israel, fire-fighting jets for Israel, a separation wall for Israel A salute for the president and his son, detonator of the revolution of support, development and protection for the terrorist Israel The mummy - 123 ! - The post starts with a lament with clear use of CWA: ‫ﯾـﺎ رﯾـت اﻟـرﯾّـس ﻛـﺎن ﺿـرﺑـﻧﺎ إﺣـﻧﺎ‬ ‫( اﻟــﺿرﺑــﺔ اﻟــﺟوﯾــﺔ‬yā re:t il-rayyis kān ḍarabna iḥna il-ḍarbah il-gawwīyah, ‘we wish the president had struck us with the air strike’), in reference to his air strike on Israel in the Air battle of Mansoura of 1973. The use of CWA is clear from the use of the phrase ‫( ﯾــــﺎ رﯾــــت‬yā re:t, ‘we wish’) as well as the use of the phonetically ‘āmmīyah spelling of ‫( رﯾــــس‬rayyis, ’president’) as opposed to the fuṣḥá spelling ‫( رﺋـﯾس‬ra’īs, ‘president’), which was also used in the example above and another example below. The rest of the post can be read as IA, since the text is bivalent. Interestingly, the latter part includes the use of the fuṣḥá word ‫( ﻣُـﻔـﺟّ ــــرا‬mufaggiran, ‘detonator’, lit. ‘exploder’) in the accusative case and the use of diacritics to emphasis the fuṣḥá pronunciation (underlined in the text below), in otherwise ‘āmmīyah text. This further makes the case for IA, as it does not interrupt the flow of the text but taking the wider context into consideration, it seems to elevate the tone of the message with the linguistic features of formal speech, given its political nature. This form of elevation is also seen in the switch to the use of the conventional fuṣḥá spelling of the word ‫‘( رﺋــــﯾــس‬president’) as opposed to the more phonetic ‘āmmīyah spelling ‫ رﯾّــس‬at the beginning of the post, creating a subtle shift in the tone of the message. The shift from ‘āmmīyah to fuṣḥá seems a more unusual shift considering most examples have shown a shift in the other direction, from fuṣḥá to ‘āmmīyah, but is seen again to a lesser degree in another satirical post below. The following example may also be described as a form of satire, since it proposes creating a new award for the most corrupt politician or public figure as voted for by the members of the group, written in CWA with subtle use of fuṣḥá forms towards the end as seen in the example above (fuṣḥá terms underlined in the text below). It does not seem that these fuṣḥá forms necessarily present a code-switch, rather they seem to be borrowed forms from fuṣḥá used seamlessly as elevated ‘āmmīyah, appropriate to the context of formal awards: - 124 ! - Example 5.25 ‫ وﻟـو وﺻـﻠﻧﺎ ﻟـﺷﻛل أو ﺻـﯾﻐﺔ ﻛـوﯾـﺳﺔ‬,‫ ﻛـﻠﻧﺎ ﺳـوا‬,‫ ﻋـﺎﯾـزﯾـن ﻧـﻔ ّﻛر ﻓـﯾﮭﺎ‬,‫ ﻓـﻲ ﻓـﻛرة ﻣـﺎﻛـﺗﻣﻠﺗش‬..‫ﺷـﺑﺎب‬ ‫ وﯾـﻣﻛن ﻛـﻣﺎن ﯾـﺑﻘﻰ ﻓـﻲ ﺗـﻐطﯾﺔ إﻋـﻼﻣـﯾﺔ ﻟـﮭﺎ! ﻋـﺎﯾـزﯾـن ﻧـﻌﻣل إﺳـﺗﻔﺗﺎء‬,‫ أﺑـرﯾـل ﻣـﻣﻛن ﺗـﻧﻔذھـﺎ‬6 ,‫ﻟـﮭﺎ‬ ‫ ﯾـﻌﻧﻲ ﻣـﺛﻼً ﺟـﺎﺋـزة‬..‫ واﻟـﺟواﺋـز ﺗـﺑﻘﻰ ﺗـﻌﺑﯾرﯾـﺔ‬,‫ﻋـن اﺳـوأ اﻟـﺷﺧﺻﯾﺎت ﻓـﻲ اﻟـﺷﺎرع اﻟـﻣﺻري‬ ‫ إﯾـﮫ رأﯾـﻛم ﻓـﻲ اﻟـﻔﻛرة وﻟـو ﻋـﻣﻠﻧﺎ اﻟـﻣﺳﺎﺑـﻘﺔ‬,‫اﻟـﺗزوﯾـر اﻟـﺗﻌﺑﯾرﯾـﺔ وﺣـﺻل ﻋـﻠﯾﮭﺎ أﺣـﻣد ﻋـز وھـﻛذا‬ ‫ﺗﺳﻣﯾﮭﺎ إﯾﮫ؟‬ [Dated December 12 2010] Shabāb.. fī fikrah makimlitsh, ‘āyzīn nifakkar fī-hā, kullina sawā, wilaw waṣalnā li-shakl aw ṣīghah kuwayyisah la-hā, 6 Abrīl mumkin tinafidhhā, wi-yimkin kamān yibqá fi taghtiyah i’lāmīyah la-hā! ‘āyzīn ni‘mil istiftā’ ‘an aswa’ il-shakhsīyāt fī il-shāri‘ il-Masrī, wi-ilgawā’iz tibqá ta‘bīrīyah.. ya‘nī mathalan gā’izat al-tazwīr alta‘bīrīyah wa-ḥaṣal ‘alayha Ahmad ‘izz wa-hākadhā, e:h ra’yukum fī il-fikrah wi-law- ‘amalnā il-musābqah tisamīhā e:h? Translation: Guys… there’s an idea we haven’t completed, we want to think about it, all together, and if we reach a good form for it, 6 April can implement it and there might even be media coverage for it! We want to have a referendum about the worst characters on the Egyptian street, and the prizes would be expressionistic… so for example the expressionistic award for fraud and the winner is Ahmed Ezz, etc. What do you think of the idea and if we have a competition, what should we call it? The following post follows on from the previous post about creating a corruption award and lists the categories for nomination. It is clearly intended as a parody of real, prestigious awards, but the humour is exemplified in the use of the borrowed word ‘award’ from English, transliterated as ‫ أوورد‬awūrd and underlined below. The parody award categories can be seen as linguistically bivalent, since there are no exclusively fuṣḥá or ‘āmmīyah features - they are shared between both. The final sentence also can be said to be bivalent, but because it combines elements that belong to fuṣḥá and elements that belong to - 125 ! ‘āmmīyah, but not shared between both. The overall language of the post could therefore be described as IA, with the mix of fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah features expressing the dichotomy in the parody of a serious/prestigious award (fuṣḥá) and the absurd/satirical categories the group has presented (‘āmmīyah): Example 5.26 ‫ ﻓﺳﺎد أوورد‬- ‫ أﺑرﯾل اﻟﺗﻌﺑﯾرﯾﺔ‬6 ‫ ﻣﺳﺎﺑﻘﺔ‬- 1 ‫ ﺗزوﯾر أوورد‬- ‫ أﺑرﯾل اﻟﺗﻌﺑﯾرﯾﺔ‬6 ‫ ﻣﺳﺎﺑﻘﺔ‬- 2 ‫ ﻣن اﻷراﺿﻲ اﻟﻣﺻرﯾﺔ اﻟﻣﺣﺗﻠﺔ‬- ‫ أﺑرﯾل اﻟﺗﻌﺑﯾرﯾﺔ‬6 ‫ ﻣﺳﺎﺑﻘﺔ‬- 3 ‫ اﻟرﻗم ﻓﻘط‬..‫ﺷﺑﺎب رﺟﺎء وﺿﻊ رﻗم اﻹﺳم اﻟﻠﻲ إﻧﺗوا ﺷﺎﯾﻔﯾﻧﮫ ﻣﻧﺎﺳب ﻟﻠﻣﺳﺎﺑﻘﺔ ف اﻟﺗﻌﻠﯾﻘﺎت‬ 1. Musābqat 6 Abrīl al-ta‘bīrīyah - fasād awūrd 2. Musābqat 6 Abrīl al-ta‘bīrīyah - tazwīr awūrd 3. Musābqat 6 Abrīl al-ta‘bīrīyah - min al-’arāḍī al-Maṣrīyah almuḥtallah Shabāb ragā’ waḍ‘ raqam al-ism illī intū shāyfīnuh munāsib lilmusābqah f al-ta‘līqāt.. al-raqam faqaṭ Translation: 1. 6 April Expressionist Competition - Corruption Award 2. 6 April Expressionist Competition - Fraud Award 3. 6 April Expressionist Competition - From the Occupied Egyptian Territories Guys please put the number of the name that you see as suitable for the competition in the comments.. just the number Another example of IA use can be seen in the following post, which is a joke about president Morsi roughly nine months into his presidency and another parody - this time of a real advertisement from the deodorant brand Axe in Egypt in which it claims it will send the winner of the most votes to the moon (brackets and ellipses from the original): - 126 ! - Example 5.27 (‫ اﺑـرﯾـل ﯾـرﺳـل ﻣـرﺳـﻲ اﻟـﻰ اﻟـﻔﺿﺎء ﻓـﻲ ﺛـﻼﺛـﺔ اﯾـﺎم )وﺑـﺻوت ﻧـزﯾـﮫ ﻣـن ﻏـﯾر زﯾـت وﺳـﻛر‬6 ‫ﺷـﺑﺎب‬ ‫… ﻣﺑروك اﻟﻣرﻛز اﻷول ﯾﺎ رﯾس‬ [Dated 22 February 2013] Shabāb 6 Abrīl yursil Mursī ilá al-faḍā’ fī thalāthat ayyām (wa-biṣawt nazīh min ghayr zayt wa-sukkar) … mabrūk il-markaz ilawwil yā rayyis Translation: 6 April Youth send Morsi into space in three days (in genuine elections without oil and sugar)… congratulations on winning first place, Mr President - 127 ! Here we see an example of a seamless transition from MSA to IA to CWA, beginning with the MSA statement: ‫ اﺑرﯾل ﯾرﺳل ﻣرﺳﻲ اﻟﻰ اﻟﻔﺿﺎء ﻓﻲ ﺛﻼﺛﺔ اﯾﺎم‬6 ‫ﺷﺑﺎب‬ (Shabāb 6 Abrīl yursil Mursī ilá al-faḍā’ fī thalāthat ’ayyām, ‘6 April Youth send Morsi into space in three days’). Written in the style of a newspaper headline, it is informative and seemingly neutral. The second part (between brackets) can be seen as strategically bivalent, transitional IA, since it can be read as wholly MSA or CWA. The final part following the ellipses can be said to be a code-switch to CWA due to the use of the phonetic spelling of ‫( رﯾـــس‬rayyis, ’president’) as seen above, and the separation of this part of the text with the ellipses. 5.3.2.2 Appeals The third example of CWA we see on the group’s FB page is the type of posts which fall into this ‘Appeals’ category. These appeals are generally a call to action of some form, their tone is positive and persuasive, appealing to the better side of their reader in order to move them to protest, vote or act in a humane way. Example 5.28 ‫[ ﻏـﻠق ﺑـﺎب اﻻﻗـﺗراع ﻓـﻲ اول اﻧـﺗﺧﺎﺑـﺎت‬sic] ‫ﺑـﺎق ﻣـن اﻟـزﻣـن ﻣـﺎ ﯾـﻘرب ﻣـن اﻟـﺛﻼث ﺳـﺎﻋـﺎت ﻋـﻠﻲ‬ ‫ ﺑـﺻرف اﻟـﻧظر ﻋـن اي ﺧـﻠط ﻟـﻼوراق او ﻋـك ﺷـﺎب اﻟـﻔﺗرة‬.. ‫رﺋـﺎﺳـﯾﺔ ﻓـﻲ ﻣـﺻر ﺑـﻌد اﻟـﺛورة‬ ‫ ﻟـﻛن ﻛـﻠﻧﺎ ﻻزم ﻧـﻛون اﯾـﺟﺎﺑـﯾﯾن ﻓـﻲ اﺧـﺗﯾﺎر‬.. ‫اﻻﻧـﺗﻘﺎﻟـﯾﺔ ﻓـﯾﻣﺎ ﯾـﺧص اﺟـراءات اﻟـﺗﺣول اﻟـدﯾـﻣﻘراطـﻲ‬ ‫ ﻣـﻣﻛن ﯾـﻛون ﻟـﺳﺔ ﻣـﺻوﺗـش ﻋـﺷﺎن ﻣـش ﻻﻗـﻲ ﻣـرﺷـﺣك اﻟـﻣﺛﺎﻟـﻲ‬.. ‫اول رﺋـﯾس ﻟـﻣﺻر ﺑـﻌد اﻟـﺛورة‬ ‫ﻓـﻲ اﺳـﻣﺎء اﻟـﻣرﺷـﺣﯾن وﯾـﻣﻛن ﻟـﺳﺔ ﻣـﺻوﺗـش ﻋـﺷﺎن ﺧـﺎﯾـف ان ﻗـرارك ﻣـش ھـﺎﯾـﺣﺗرم زي ﻣـﺎ‬ .. ‫ ﻣـن ﻓـﺿﻠك ﻓـﻛر اﻻن واﺣﺳـﺑﮭﺎ ﺻـﺢ‬.‫اﻟـﻌﺳﻛر ﻣـﺎ اﺣـﺗرﻣـش ﻗـرارات اﻟـﺷﻌب ﻓـﻲ اﻻﺳـﺗﻔﺗﺎء‬ ‫ ﻟـﯾﮫ ﻣـﺎﺗـﺷﺎرﻛـش ﻓـﻲ اﺧـﺗﯾﺎر‬.. ‫اﻟـﻣﻼﯾـﯾن اﻟـﻠﻲ ﻧـزﻟـت ﻣـن اﻣـﺑﺎرح ﻧـزﻟـت ﻋـﺷﺎن ﺗـﺧﺗﺎر ﻟـﯾﻧﺎ ﻛـﻠﻧﺎ‬ ‫ ﻟـو ﻛـﻧت ﺻـوت اﺗـﺻل ﺑـﻛل اﻟـﻠﻲ‬.. ‫[ ﺻـوﺗـك‬sic] ‫اﻟـرﺋـﯾس!؟ اھـداف اﻟـﺛورة ﻓـﻲ ﺣـﺎﺟـﺔ اﻟـﻲ‬ ،‫ اﻣـﺎ ﻟـو ﻛـﻧت اﻧـت ﻧـﻔﺳك ﻟـﺳﺔ ﻣـﺎﺧـﺗرﺗـش‬.. ‫ﺗـﻌرﻓـﮫ ﻟـﺳﺔ ﻣـﺻوﺗـش وﺧـﻠﯾﮫ ﯾـﻧزل ﯾـدﻋـم اھـداف اﻟـﺛورة‬ .‫ﯾﺑﻘﻰ ﺣﻛم ﻋﻘﻠك وﺿﻣﯾرك واﻧزل ﻣن ﺑﯾﺗك‬ [Dated May 2012] Baqī min al-zaman mā yuqrib min al-thalāth sā‘āt ‘alá ghalq bāb al-iqtirā‘ fī awwal intikhābāt ri’āsīyah fī Miṣr ba‘d althawrah .. bi-ṣarf al-naẓar ‘an ayy khalṭ lil-awrāq aw ‘ak shābb al-fatrah al-intiqālīyah fī-mā yakhuṣṣ igrā’āt al-taḥawwul al- - 128 ! - dīmuqrātī .. lākin kullinā lāzim nukūn igābīyīn fī ikhtīyār awwil ra’īs li-Maṣr ba‘d il-thawrah .. mumkin yikūn lissah maṣawwatish ‘ashān mish lāqī murashiḥak il-mithālī fī asmā’ il-murashiḥīn wiyimkin lissah maṣawatish ‘ashān khāyif inn qarārak mish hayuḥtaram zayy mā il-‘askar mā iḥtaramsh qarārat il-sha‘b fī ilistiftā’. Min fadlak fakkar il-ān wi-iḥsibhā saḥ .. il-malāyīn illī nizlit min imbārih nizlit ‘ashān tikhtār lī-na kullinā .. līh matshāriksh fī ikhtiyār il-ra’īs!? Ahdāf il-thawrah fī ḥāgah ilá ṣo:tak .. law kunt ṣawwat ittisil bi-kul illī ti‘rafuh lissah ma-ṣawwatsh wi-khalīh yinzil yid’am āhdaf il-thawrah .. ammā law kunt inta nafsak lissah makhtartish, yibqa ḥakkim ‘aqlak wi-damīrak wi-inzil min be:tak. Nearly three hours left before voting closes in the first presidential elections in Egypt after the revolution. Setting aside any mixing of papers or foul play during the transitional period with regards to the transition to democracy… we all must be positive about choosing the first President of Egypt after the - 129 ! revolution… it may be that you haven’t voted yet because you can’t found your ideal candidate amongst the names of the candidates or maybe you haven’t voted yet because you fear your decision won’t be respected just as the army didn’t respect the people’s decisions in the referendum. Please think now and calculate it correctly… the millions who have gone out since yestedat went out to choose for us all… why don’t you take part in choosing the President!? The aims of the revolution need your vote (voice)… if you have voted call everyone you know who hasn’t voted and make them go out and support the aims of the revolution .. and if you yourself haven’t chosen, then listen to your mind and your heart and go out of (leave) your house. In the example illustrated above, we see a clear example of the MSA-IACWA structure found elsewhere in the group’s posts, as well as in other online forums and print publications, discussed in this study. The MSA style and fuṣḥá terms in the CWA part have been highlighted in bold, with underlining added to highlight the transitional IA part and the hybrid form in the CWA. In this post as in others above, we take any punctuation (whether full stop or ellipsis) to indicate a break and therefore a marker of the sentence boundary. We see that the structure of the post follows a set and predictable pattern that is seen elsewhere, where the first part of the text, in this case the first sentence highlighted in bold in the text, is written in MSA style. The language use mirrors the content well, since this first part of the text sets an ‘official’ tone, using the language of an official or public statement. The content is informative, presenting facts, and neutral or non-emotive. The second sentence, which is underlined in the text can be seen as a transitional sentence written in IA as it is predominantly but the underlined word ‫‘( ﻋــــك‬ak, ‘foul-play’) is ‘āmmīyah. This can be said to be the reverse of Educated Spoken Arabic, which uses some fuṣḥá lexical items in predominantly ‘āmmīyah speech. The remainder of text is in CWA, with monovalent words underlined. There are also three high-‘āmmīyah or even fuṣḥá terms highlighted in bold, highlighted because they could have been written using more phonetically-‘āmmīyah spellings, but their appearance in this form serves to elevate the overall ‫‪- 130‬‬ ‫!‬ ‫‬‫‪CWA style and bring more of a sense of urgency or seriousness to the‬‬ ‫)’‪ (ra’īs, ‘president‬رﺋــــﯾـس ‪ (asmā’, ‘names’),‬اﺳــــﻣـﺎء ‪appeal. These words are:‬‬ ‫‪ (fī ḥāgah ilá, ‘need’). We see a switch in content coinciding‬ﻓـﻲ ﺣـﺎﺟـﺔ اﻟـﻲ ‪and‬‬ ‫‪with the switch in writing style, from informative and factual to emotive‬‬ ‫‪and urgent, in the appeal to potential voters to go out and vote for the‬‬ ‫‪next president.‬‬ ‫‪The following post is an appeal to leave out water for birds and animals to‬‬ ‫‪drink in the heat, written in CWA with the typographically marked‬‬ ‫‪” that are regularly used in ESA:‬ﻛوﻟدﯾر‪/‬ﺑرّ اد“ ‪borrowed words‬‬ ‫‪Example 5.29‬‬ ‫ﺳـﻼم ﻋـﻠﯾﻛم‪ ..‬ﻓـﻲ اﻷﯾـﺎم اﻟﺣـر اﻟـﻣﻣﯾﺗﺔ دي‪ ،‬اﻟـﻠﻲ ﺟـﻧب ﺑـﯾﺗﮫ أو ﻣﺣـﻠﮫ “ﻛـوﻟـدﯾـر‪/‬ﺑـرّ اد” ﻣـﯾﺔ ﻓـﻲ‬ ‫اﻟـﺷﺎرع‪ ،‬ﯾـﺎ رﯾـت ﯾﮭـﺗم ﺑـﻧﺿﺎﻓـﺗﮫ وﻟـو ﯾـﻘدر ﯾﺷـﺗري ﻟـﮫ ﻛـوﺑـﺎﯾـﺎت ﺑـﻼﺳـﺗﯾك ﺟـدﯾـدة ﯾـﺑﻘﻰ ﻛـوﯾـس‪..‬‬ ‫واﻟـﻠﻲ ﻋـﻧده ﻋـﺻﺎﻓـﯾر زﯾـﻧﺔ ﻓـﻲ اﻟـﺑﻠﻛوﻧـﺔ ﯾـﺎ رﯾـت ﯾـﺑﻘﻰ ﯾـدﺧـﻠﮭﺎ اﻟـﺑﯾت ﺷـوﯾـﺔ ﻋـﺷﺎن ﻣـﺎﺗﺗﺳـﻠﻘش ﻓـﻲ‬ ‫اﻟﺣـر‪ ،‬وﯾـﻐﯾر ﻟـﮭﺎ اﻟـﻣﯾﺔ ﻛـل ﻣـﺎ ﺗـﺣﺗﺎج‪ ..‬ﻣـﻣﻛن ﺗﺣـط طـﺑق ﻓـﯾﮫ ﻣـﯾﺔ ﻓـﻲ ﺳـور اﻟـﺑﻠﻛوﻧـﺔ ﺑـﺗﺎﻋـﺗك أو‬ ‫ﻋـﻠﻰ ﺳـطﺢ اﻟـﺑﯾت ﺟـﺎﯾـز طـﯾور ﺗﺷـرب ﻣـﻧﮫ‪ ..‬واﻟـﻠﻲ ﻋـﻧده ﻗـطط أو ﻛـﻼب‪ ،‬أو ﻣـرﺑـﯾﯾن ﻓـراخ وﺑـط‬ ‫أو أراﻧـب وﺧـرﻓـﺎن‪ ،‬ﯾﮭـﺗم إﻧـﮫ ﯾـﻛون ﻋـﻧدھـم ﯾﺷـرﺑـوا طـول اﻟـوﻗـت وﯾـرش ﺧـﻔﯾف ﻋـﻠﻰ اﻻرﺿـﯾﺔ‬ ‫ﺗﺣﺗﮭم ﻣﯾﺔ ﻛل ﺷوﯾﺔ‪ ..‬اﻟﻠﻲ ﯾﻘدر ﯾﺧﻔف ﻟو ﺑﺄﻗل اﻟﻘﻠﯾل ﻋن إﻧﺳﺎن أو ﺣﯾوان‪ ،‬ﯾﺑﻘﻰ ﻛ ّﺗر ﺧﯾره‬ ‫]‪[Dated 2 June 2013‬‬ - 131 ! Salāmu ‘ale:kum.. fī il-ayyām il-ḥarr il-mumītah dī, illī ganb be:tuh aw maḥalluh “cūlde:r/barrād” mayyah fī il-shāri‘, yā re:t yihtamm bi-naḍaftuh wi-law yiqdar yishtirī luh kūbbāyāt bilāstīk gidīdah yibqá kwayyis.. wi-illī ‘anduh ‘asāfīr zīnah fī il-balako:na yā re:t yibqá yidakhkhalhā il-be:t shwayyah ‘ashān ma-titsili’sh fī il-ḥarr, wi-yighayyar la-hā il-mayyah kull mā tiḥtāg.. mumkin tuḥutt tabaq fīh mayyah fī sūr il-balako:nah bitā’tak aw ‘alá saṭḥ il-be:t gāyiz ṭuyūr tishrab minnuh.. wi-illī ‘anduh quṭaṭ aw kilāb, aw mirabbīyīn firākh wi-baṭṭ aw arānib wi-khirfān, yihtamm innuh yikūn ‘anduhum yishrabū ṭūl il-waqt wi-yirushsh khafīf ‘alá il-’arḍīyah taḥtuhum mayyah kull shwayyah.. illī yiqdar yikhaffif law bi-’aqall al-qalīl ‘an insān aw ḥayawān, yibqá kattar khe:ruh Translation: Hello… in these days of extreme heat, whoever has a water cooler in the street near their house or shop, we hope will take care to clean it and if they can buy some new plastic cups for it, that would be great… and anyone who keeps birds in their balcony we hope will bring them indoors for a while so they don’t melt in the heat, and change their water when needed… you could put a dish of water on your balcony wall or on your roof for birds to drink from… and those who have cats or dogs, or keep chickens or ducks or rabbits and sheep, make sure they have enough to drink at all times and sprinkle water on their floor often.. whoever can lighten the load by the smallest amount of a human or animal, is very kind Another post, dated December 14 2010, provides another example of appeals written in CWA. This appeal is for a name for the parody awards the group’s members have agreed to set up: Example 5.30 ‫ ﻣـن ﻏـﺎﻟـﺑﯾﺔ ﺗـﻌﻠﯾﻘﺎﺗـﻛم ﺑـﺧﺻوص اﻹﺳـﺗﻔﺗﺎء‬..‫ﺷـﺑﺎب إﺣـﻧﺎ إﺗـﻌودﻧـﺎ ھـﻧﺎ ﻛـل ﺧـطوة ﺟـدﯾـدة ﻧـﺎﺧـدھـﺎ ﺳـوا‬ ,‫ دﻟـوﻗـﺗﻲ ﻋـﺎﯾـزﯾـن إﺳـم ﺑـس ﻟـﻠﻣﺳﺎﺑـﻘﺔ‬..‫ ﻛـﻠﮫ ﺗـﻘرﯾـﺑﺎ ً واﻓـق إﻧـﻧﺎ ﻧـﻌﻣﻠﮭﺎ‬,‫ﻋـﻠﻰ اﺳـوأ ﺷـﺧﺻﯾﺎت اﻷﻣـﺔ‬ ‫ ھو اﻟﻠﻲ ھﺎﻧﻌﻣل اﻟﻣﺳﺎﺑﻘﺔ ﺑﯾﮫ‬..‫ ھﺎﻧﺧﺗﺎره ﺳوا‬,‫أﻓﺿل ﻋﻧوان أو إﺳم‬ Shabāb iḥnā it‘awwidnā hinā kull khaṭwah gidīdah nakhudhā sawā.. min ghālibīyit ta‘līqātkum bi-khuṣūṣ il-istiftā’ ‘ala aswa’ shakhṣīyāt - 132 ! il-ummah, kulluh taqrīban wāfiq inninā ni‘milhā.. dilwa’tī ‘ayzīn ism bas lil-musābqah, afḍal ‘inwān aw ism, hanikhtāruh sawā.. huwwa illī hani‘mil il-musābqah bīh Translation: Guys we’re used to taking each new step together… from the majority of your comments regarding the referendum about the worst national characters, almost everyone agreed that we should do it… now we want just a name for the competition, the best title or name, we’ll choose it together… it will be used for the competition This post is interesting in that it can be compared to earlier (pre-December 2010) opinion polls and questions to the audience, which were written in MSA and perhaps by virtue of being written in MSA, sounded more formal and distant. This post begins with an immediate connection to the audience by using the word ‫‘( ﺷــــﺑﺎب‬guys’) to address the reader. The rest of the post is written in the first person plural, emphasising the unity and closeness of the group, as well as the equality of its members, giving the sense of a democratic group, which is further emphasised by their stating: ‫‘( ھــــﺎﻧــــﺧـﺗـﺎره ﺳــــوا‬we will choose it [the name] together’). In previous preDecember 2010 invitations for example, the third person was used, creating a perceived distance between the physical group (6th April Youth Movement) and the virtual one (members of the online group). It is posts like these, written in CWA as opposed to MSA, in the first person as opposed to the second person, emphasising the democratic decisionmaking process of the group and explicitly including the wider group in this decision-making process, that allowed the group to organise and lead its members to take action in the form of protests in the physical-world. 5.3.2.3 Ideas, thoughts and feelings Something of an inspirational post, the first example below in CWA refers to the January 25 2011 protests and again uses the first person voice in order to create a sense of closeness between the writer and reader, as well as a sense of democracy and equality between the members of the group. Its tone is optimistic and the writer is reaching out to the rapidly - 133 ! growing membership of the group. Together with the other examples written in CWA below, we can see how language use was able to create a sense of unity, collective strength and purpose, and later mobilise the group’s members in increasing numbers to take to the streets in solidarity together, defying the authorities and political convention in Egypt. Example 5.31 ‫ ﺷـﻰء‬..‫ ﻟـﻛل ﻋـﺿو ﺑـﺎﻟـﺻﻔﺣﺔ ﺑـﻌت ﻟـﻧﺎ وطـﻠب اﻹﻧـﺿﻣﺎم‬,‫ﺣـﻘﯾﻘﻲ ﯾـﺎ ﺷـﺑﺎب ﺗـﺣﯾﺔ ﺟـﺎﻣـدة ﺟـداً ﻣـﻧﻧﺎ‬ ‫ ﻛـﻠﻧﺎ‬..‫ﻣُـﻔرح إن اﻟـﻌدد اﻟـﻛﺑﯾر ده ﻣـﻧﻧﺎ ﯾـﻛون ﻋـﻧده رﻏـﺑﺔ ﺣـﻘﯾﻘﯾﺔ إﻧـﮫ ﯾـﻌﻣل ﺷـﻰء ﻣـﻠﻣوس ﻟـﻣﺻر‬ ‫ أو ﺑـس أﻋـﺿﺎء ﻓـﻲ اﻟـﺻﻔﺣﺔ ھـﺎﻧـﺣﺎول ﻧـﻣد إﯾـدﯾـﻧﺎ ﻟـﺑﻌض وﻧـﻌﻣل‬,‫ أﺑـرﯾـل‬6 ‫ھـﻧﺎ ﺳـواء أﻋـﺿﺎء ﻓـﻲ‬ ‫ ﺣد ﻓﯾﻛم ﻣﺗﻔﺎﺋل ﻣﻌﺎﯾﺎ؟‬,‫ أﻧﺎ ﻣﺗﻔﺎﺋل ﺟداً واﻷﻣل ﻓﻲ رﺑﻧﺎ ﻛﺑﯾر‬..‫ﺣﺎﺟﺔ ﻟﺑﻠدﻧﺎ‬ Ḥaqīqī yā shabāb taḥīyah gāmdah giddan minninā, li-kull ‘uḍw bi-ilṣafḥah ba‘at li-nā wi-ṭalab il-inḍimām.. she:’ mufriḥ in il-‘adad ilkibīr dah minninā yikun ‘anduh raghbah ḥaqīqīyah innuh yi‘mil she:’ malmus li-Maṣr.. kullinā hinā sawā’ a‘ḍā’ fī 6 Abrīl, aw bas a‘ḍā’ fī il-ṣafḥah hanḥāwil nimidd īdīnā li-ba‘ḍ wi-ni‘mil ḥāgah libaladnā.. anā mutafā’il giddan wi-il-amal fī rabbbinā kibīr, ḥadd fīkum mutafā’il ma’āyā? Honestly guys a huge thank you, to every member of the page who’s sent us a member request.. it makes us so happy to see so many people with the desire to do something tangible for Egypt… we will all, whether members of 6 April or just the page, try to extend our hands to each other and do something for our country.. I’m very optimistic and have a lot of hope, are you optimistic with me? Example 5.32 ‫ﺷﺑﺎب ﻣﺻر ﻟﻣﺎ ب ﯾﻛون إﯾد واﺣدة ب ﯾﻌﻣل ﻛﺗﯾر‬ 2008 ‫ أﺑرﯾل‬6 ‫إﺿراب‬ ‫ اﻷﺣـزاب إﺗـرﯾـﻘت ع اﻟـﻠﻲ‬,‫ اﻹﺧـوان رﻓـﺿوا اﻟـﻣﺷﺎرﻛـﺔ ﻓـﯾﮫ‬,‫اﻟـﺣﻛوﻣـﺔ ھـددت اﻟـﻠﻲ ھـﺎﯾـﺷﺎرك ﻓـﯾﮫ‬ ‫ھﺎﯾﺷﺎرك ﻓﯾﮫ‬ ‫ﻟﻛن ﺷﺑﺎب ﻣﺻر ﻛﺎن أﻗوى ﻣن اﻟﻛل ﺑﺈﯾﻣﺎﻧﮫ ﺑـ رﺑﻧﺎ وﺑــ ﺣﺑﮫ ﻟﻣﺻر‬ ‫إﺣﻧﺎ ﻧﻘدر ﯾﺎ ﺷﺑﺎب‬ Shabāb Maṣr lammā bi-yikūn īd waḥdah bi-yi‘mil kitīr - 134 ! Iḍrāb 6 Abrīl 2008 Il-ḥukūmah haddidit illī hayshārik fīh, il-Ikhwān rafaḍū il-mushārkah fīh, il-aḥzāb ittaryaqit ‘a[lá] illī hayshārik fīh Lākin shabāb Maṣr kān aqwá min il-kull bi-īmānuh bi-rabbinā wi-biḥubbuh li-Maṣr Iḥna niqdar yā shabāb Translation: When the youth of Egypt stand hand in hand they can do a lot 6 April 2008 Strike The government has threatened whoever takes part, the Brotherhood have refused to take part, the [other political] parties have made fun of whoever takes part But the youth of Egypt is stronger than all with their faith in God and their love for Egypt We can do it guys Example 5.33 ‫اﻟـﺛورة اﻛـﺑر ﻣـن ﻛـدا واﻋـﻣق ﻣـن‬....‫اﻟـﺛورة ﻣـش ﻣـﻌﻧﺎھـﺎ اﻧـﻧﺎ ﻧـﻐﯾر رؤوس ﻧـظﺎم ﻓـﺎﺳـد وﺑـس‬ ‫ﻟـﺳﮫ ﺑـﻘﺎﯾـﺎ‬...‫اﻟـﺛورة ﺗـﻌﻧﻰ ﺗـﻐﯾﯾر ﺣـﻘﯾﻘﻰ ﻟـﻼﺣـﺳن ﯾـﺣس ﺑـﯾﮫ اﻟـﻣواطـن اﻟـﻌﺎدى ﻓـﻰ ﺣـﯾﺎﺗـﮫ اﻟـﯾوﻣـﯾﺔ‬..‫ﻛـدا‬ ‫وﻟــﺳﮫ اﻟــﻣﺷوار طــوﯾــل ﻋــﺷﺎن ﻧــﻐﯾره‬...‫اﻟــﻔﺳﺎد ﻣــﺗﻐﻠﻐﻠﺔ وﻣــﺎدة ﺟــذورھــﺎ ﻓــﻰ ﻣــﺟﺗﻣﻌﻧﺎ‬ ‫اذا ﻛـﺎن‬...‫اﻟـﺛورة ﻋـﻠﻣﺗﻧﺎ اﻧـﻧﺎ ﻣـﻧﺳﻛﺗش ﻋـﻠﻰ اﻟـظﻠم واﻧـﻧﺎ ﻧـﺎﺧـد ﺣـﻘﻧﺎ ﻣـﮭﻣﺎ ﻛـﺎن اﻟـﺗﻣن‬....‫ﻟـﻼﺣـﺳن‬ ‫ھـﻣﺎ ﻋـﻧدھـم دوﻟـﺔ ﻓـﺳﺎد ﻋـﻣﯾﻘﺔ ﻓـﺎﺣـﻧﺎ ھﻧﺧـﻠﻰ ﺛـورﺗـﻧﺎ اﻛـﺛر ﻋـﻣﻘﺎ ﻋـﺷﺎن ﺗـوﺻـل ﻟـﻛل ﻓـﺎﺳـد‬ ‫ﺛورﺗﻧﺎ ﻣﺳﺗﻣرة‬......‫وﺗﻐﯾره‬ Il-thawrah mish ma‘nāhā inninā nighayyar ru’ūs niẓām fāsid wibass … il-thawrah akbar min kidā wi-a‘maq min kidā … ilthawrah ta‘nī taghyīr ḥaqīqī lil-ahsan yiḥiss bi-h il-muwātin il-‘ādī fī ḥayatuh il-yawmīyah … lissah baqāyā il-fasād mutaghalghilah wimāddah gudhūrhā fī mugtama‘nā … wi-lissah il-mishwār tawīl ‘ashān nighayyaruh lil-ahsan … il-thawrah ‘allimitnā inninā maniskutsh ‘alá il-ẓulm wi-inninā nākhud haqqinā mahmā kān iltaman … idhā kān hummā ‘anduhum dawlit fasād ‘amīqah faiḥnā hankhallī thawritnā akthar ‘umqan ‘ashān tūwṣal li-kull fāsid wi-tghayyaruh … thawritna mustamirrah Translation: Revolution doesn’t mean changing only the figureheads of a corrupt regime… revolution is bigger and deeper - 135 ! than that… revolution means real and positive change that can be felt by the average citizen in their everyday life… the remnants of corruption still lay deep in our society… and we have a long way to go to achieve positive change… the revolution has taught us not to keep quiet about injustice and to take our rights whatever the price may be… if they have a corrupt deep state then we will make our revolution deeper in order to reach each corrupt person and change them… the revolution continues In the example above, we see an elevation of the CWA, with the use of two fuṣḥá features in bold above (bold added): the feminine imperfect verb ‫( ﺗــــﻌـﻧـﻲ‬ta‘nī, ‘mean’), instead of the use of the masculine, which is more customary in ‘āmmīyah; and ‫( اﻛــــﺛـر ﻋــــﻣـﻘـﺎ‬akthar ‘umqan, ‘deeper’, lit. ‘more depth’), with the spelling of ‫( اﻛــــﺛـر‬akthar, ‘more’) rather than the more phonetically āmmīyah spelling ‫ اﻛــﺗر‬with a /t/ as was used in the underlined word (underlining added) ‫( اﻟـﺗﻣن‬il-taman, ‘the price’) which would be ‫( اﻟـﺛﻣـن‬ilthaman, ‘the price’) with a /th/ phoneme in fuṣḥá; and the accusative case of ‫‘( ﻋــــﻣــﻘــﺎ‬umqan, ‘depth’) with the alif signalling nunation. These two examples could be seen as intra-sentential code-switches or simply borrowings from fuṣḥá with the purpose of elevating the ‘āmmīyah. 5.3.2.4 Photo and video commentaries This category contrasts with the ‘photo and video captions’ category of MSA posts, which appeared early in the group’s timeline and were neutral in terms of content, simply describing the content of a photo or video. Commentaries on photos and videos expressing the group’s reaction to or analysis of the content shared, started to appear after the death of Khaled Said in June 2010. A photo of the group sharing a meal during Ramadan together, was posted with the following text in CWA to show the reader they are fun, normal young people, despite being political: - 136 ! Example 5.34 ..‫ ﺑﻧﮭـزر وﺑـﻧﻠﻌب‬..‫وﻻ اﺣـﻧﺎ ﺷـﺑﺎب ﺧـﻧﯾق اﺣـﻧﺎ ﺷـﺑﺎب ﻋـﺎدى‬.. ‫اﻻﻓـطﺎر ﺑـﺗﺎﻋـﻧﺎ ﻣـش ﺑـﯾﻛون ﺧـﻧﯾق‬ ‫ وﻣــوﺟــوﻋــﯾن‬..‫ﺑــس اﻟــﻔرق اﻧــﻧﺎ ﻣــﮭﻣوﻣــﯾن ﺑــﺎﻟــﺑﻠد دى‬..‫ﻓــﯾﻧﺎ ﺳــوﻛــﺎ وﻟــوﻛــﺎ وﻣــوﺗــﺎ وﺷــﻛﻠﻣﮫ‬ ‫ﺑﯾﺣب ﻣﺻر‬..‫ﺷﺑﺎب ﺣر‬.. ‫اﺣﻧﺎ ﺷﺑﺎب ﻣﺻر‬..‫وﻧﻔﺳﻧﺎ ﻧﻐﯾرھﺎ ﻟﻸﻓﺿل‬.. ‫ﺑﺄوﺟﺎﻋﮭﺎ‬ Il-iftār bita‘nā mish biykūn khanī’… wa-lā iḥnā shabāb khanī’ iḥnā shabāb ‘ādī… binhazzar wi-nil‘ab… fī-nā sūkā wi-lūkā wi-mūtā wi-shaklamah… bass il-farq inninā mahmūmīn bi-il-balad dī… wimawgū‘īn bi-awgā’ha… wi-nifsinā nighayyarhā lil-afḍal… iḥnā shabāb Maṣr… shabāb ḥurr… bīyḥibb Maṣr Translation: Our Iftars [evening meal during the month of Ramadan] are not boring, and we are not boring people, we are normal young people… we joke and play, mess about and hang around… but the difference is that we are concerned about this country… we feel its pains and wish to change it for the better… we are the youth of Egypt… we are free… and love Egypt A video shared of an on-air argument between a prominent Egyptian journalist (Mahmoud Saad) and the Minister for Higher Education at the time, had one line at the top written by the group, clearly expressing their low opinion of the minister, in CWA: Example 5.35 ‫ إﺗﻠم و ﻟم ﻟﺳﺎﻧك ﺑﻘﻰ‬.‫ داﻧﺗﺎ ﺑﺗﺣﺞ ﯾﺎ ﻣﻧﯾل‬....‫ﻛداب ﻗوى‬ [Dated 7 November, 2010] Kaddāb qawī… dāntā [dā intā] bithigg yā minayyil. Itlamm wi-limm lisānak baqá Translation: Such a liar… and you go on the Haj pilgrimage you scum. Have some shame and stop lying Further examples of commentary-style posts written in CWA: Example 5.36 - 137 ! ‫ إﺑـﻌد ﻋـن‬..‫دي اﻷﻓـﻛﺎر اﻟـﻠﻲ زرﻋـﮭﺎ اﻟﺣـزب اﻟـوطـﻧﻲ اﻟـﻔﺎﺳـد ﻓـﻲ اﻟـﻧﺎس اﻟﺑﺳـطﺎء واﻟـﻐﻼﺑـﺔ‬ ‫ وآﻻف اﻟﺟـﻣل اﻟـﻣوروﺛـﺔ اﻟـﻠﻲ ﻋـﻣوا ﺑـﯾﮭﺎ‬..‫ وﻋـﺎﯾـزﯾـن ﻧـﺎﻛـل ﻋـﯾش‬,‫ وإﻣﺷـﻲ ﺟـﻧب اﻟـﺣﯾط‬,‫اﻟﺳـﯾﺎﺳـﺔ‬ ‫ ﻛل واﺣد ﻣن ﺣﻘﮫ ﯾﻌﯾش ﺑﺣرﯾﺔ وﻛراﻣﮫ ﻓﻲ ﺑﻠده‬..‫اﻟﻧﺎس وﺿﻠﻠوھم وﺧوّ ﻓوھم‬ Dī il-afkār illī zara‘hā il-ḥizb il-watanī il-fāsid fī il-nās il-busatā’ wi-ilghalābah… ib‘id ‘an il-sīyāsah, wi-imshī ganb il-ḥīṭ, wi-‘ayzīn nākul ‘īsh… wi-ālāf il-gumal il-mawrūthah illī ‘amū bi-hā il-nās wiḍallilūhum wi-khawwifūhum… kull wāḥid min ḥaqquh yi‘īsh biḥurrīyah wi-karāmah fī baladuh Translation: These are the thoughts that the corrupt National Party [the leading political party of Mubarak’s era] planted into the minds of the poor and simple people… stay away from politics, play it safe, we need to eat… and thousands of inherited lines they used to blind, mislead and instil fear in people… everyone has the right to live with freedom and dignity in their country Example 5.37 ‫وﺣـﺿرﺗـك ھـرﺑـت ﻟـﯾﮫ ﻟـﻣﺎ اﻧـت واﺛـق؟ وﻻ اﻟـﻠﻰ ھـرب ﺑـﯾرﺟـﻊ واﻟـﻠﻰ اﺧـﺗﻔﻰ ﺑﯾظﮭـر واﻟـﻣﻘرات اﻟـﻠﻰ‬ ‫ اﻟﻧظﺎم راﺟﻊ ده ﺣﻠﻣﻛم و اﻟﺛورة راﺟﻌﺔ ده وﻋدﻧﺎ‬.‫اﺗﻘﻔﻠت رﺟﻌت اﺗﻔﺗﺣت‬ Wi-ḥadritak hiribt līh lammā intā wāthiq? Wallā illī hirib bīyirga‘ wi-illī ikhtafá bīyiẓhar wi-il-maqarrāt illī itqafalit rig‘it itfataḥit. Il-niẓām nāgi‘ dah ḥilmukum wi-il-thawrah rāg‘ah dah wa‘dinā Translation: So why have you run away sir, if you are so sure? Or does the one who runs away come back, and the one who has disappeared reappear / the things that have disappeared reappear, and the headquarters that have closed reopen. That the regime is returning is your dream and that the revolution is returning is our promise Example 5.38 ‫ و ﻟـﻐﺎﯾـﺔ ﻣـﺎ اﻟـراﺟـل ده ﯾـﺑﻘﻰ ﻟـﮫ‬، ‫* ﻟـﻐﺎﯾـﺔ ﻣـﺎ اﻟـﻣواطـن ده ﯾـﻼﻗـﻰ ﺷـﻘﺔ ﯾـﻧﺎم ﻓـﯾﮭﺎ ھـﻧﻔﺿل ﻣـﻛﻣﻠﯾن‬ ‫ و‬، ‫ﺷـﻐل ﯾـﻘدر ﯾـﺻرف ﺑـﯾﮫ ﻋـﻠﻰ ﻧـﻔﺳﮫ و ﯾـﺗﺟوز ﺑـﯾﮫ و ﯾـﺻرف ﻋـﻠﻰ أوﻻده اﺣـﻧﺎ ﻣـﻛﻣﻠﯾن‬ .‫ﻟﻐﺎﯾﺔ ﻣﺎ ﯾﺣس اﻟراﺟل ده ﺑﻛراﻣﺗﮫ ﻛﺎﻧﺳﺎن و ﯾﻔﺧر أﻧﮫ اﺗوﻟد و ﺟﻧﺳﯾﺗﮫ ﻣﺻرﯾﺔ اﺣﻧﺎ ﻣﻛﻣﻠﯾن‬ Li-ghāyit mā il-muwāṭin dah yilāqī shaqqah yinām fīhā hanifḍal mikammilīn, wi-lighāyit ma il-rāgil dah yibqa luh shughl yiqdar yiṣrif bī-h ‘ala nafsuh wi-yitgawwiz bī-h wi-yiṣrif ‘ala awlāduh iḥnā - 138 ! mikamilīn, wi-lighāyit ma yiḥiss il-rāgil dah bi-karamtuh ka-insān wi-yifkhar innuh itwalad wi-ginsīyituh Maṣrīyah iḥnā mikammilīn Translation: Until this citizen finds an apartment to sleep in we will continue; until this man has a job so that he can provide for himself, get married and provide for his children we will continue; until this mans feels dignity as a human being and pride to have been born here and that his nationality is Egyptian we will continue. The following are examples of photo and video commentaries written in IA style, with a clear, typographically-marked switch from fuṣḥá (description of the content) to ‘āmmīyah (opinion of the content). Underlining is added to the ‘āmmīyah text in the examples below: Example 5.39 ‫ ﻣـﯾن‬..‫ ﺗـﻔﺗﻛروا ﻟـو ﻛـﻠﻧﺎ ھـﺎﺟـرﻧـﺎ ﺑﺟـد‬..‫أﻏـﻧﯾﺔ ﻣـؤﻟـﻣﺔ وﻣـﻌﺑّرة ﻷﺑـﻌد ﻣـدى ﻋـن اﻟـﺗﻔﻛﯾر ﻓـﻲ اﻟﮭﺟـرة‬ ‫ ﻣـﯾن ﯾـﻣد ﻟـﮭﺎ إﯾـده واﻟـدﯾـﺎﺑـﺔ ب ﺗـﻧﮭش ﻛـل ﯾـوم ف‬,‫ وﯾـﻣﺳﺢ دﻣـوﻋـﮭﺎ‬,‫ھـﺎﯾـﻘف ﻟـﻣﺻر اﻟﺣـزﯾـﻧﺔ‬ ‫ ﻧﺳﯾﺑﮭﺎ ﻟﻣﯾن؟ ﺣد ﯾﻌرف؟‬..‫ﻟﺣﻣﮭﺎ‬ Ughnīyah mu’limah wa-mu’abbirah li-ab’ad madá ‘an al-tafkīr fī alhigrah.. tiftikrū law kullinā hāgirnā bi-gadd.. mīn hayuqaf li-Maṣr il-hazīnah, wi-yimsah dumū’hā, mīn yimidd la-hā īduh wi-ildīyābah bi-tinhash kull yo:m fi laḥmahā.. nisībhā li-mīn? Ḥadd yi’raf? Translation: An extremely painful song about considering emigration… if we were all to emigrate.. who would stand up for sorrowful Egypt, and wipe her tears? Who would extend their hand to her while the wolves eat away at her flesh every day.. who would we leave it to? Does anyone know? In the example above, the first part is bivalent, since it can be read as MSA or ‘elevated’ CWA. It is interesting that the content, a song about someone considering immigrating, is described as ‘painful’, which moves it out of the straightforward ‘neutral’ style of description and into a more emotional one, which may explain the bivalent/elevated CWA style of writing, rather than a more clearly/exclusively MSA style. The next part in - 139 ! CWA is clearly separated with ellipsis and gives an opinion about immigrating from Egypt, including a rhetorical question at the end. In the example below, we see a rather more straightforward use of MSA, which suits the factual, report-like tone, followed by a direct quote of what is said in the clip, indicated by the use of a colon after ‫‘( ﻗﺎل‬he said’): Example 5.40 ‫ﺑـﺎﻷﻣـس ﻓـﻲ ﺣـﻠﻘﺔ "آﺧـر ﻛـﻼم" ﻋـﻧدﻣـﺎ ﺳـﺄل ﯾﺳـري ﻓـودة اﻟـرواﺋـﻲ اﻟـراﺋـﻊ ﻋـﻼء اﻷﺳـواﻧـﻲ ھـل أﻧـت‬ ‫ﻣـﺗﻔﺎﺋـل رﻏـم ﻛـل ﻣـﺎ ﺗـﻣر ﺑـﮫ ﻣـﺻر؟ ف رد ﻋـﻼء اﻷﺳـواﻧـﻲ ﺑـﺈﺟـﺎﺑـﺔ راﺋـﻌﺔ ﺣـﯾث ذﻛـر أن ﺟـزء ﻣـن‬ ,‫ وﯾـطﺎﻟـب ﺑـﺣﻘوﻗـﮫ‬,‫ ﺗـﻧدھـش إﻧـك ﺗـﺷوف ﺷـﺑﺎب ﯾـطﺎﻟـب ﺑـﺎﻟـﺗﻐﯾﯾر‬:‫ﺗـﻔﺎﺋـﻠﮫ ﺑﺳـﺑﺑﻛم أﻧـﺗم وﻗـﺎل‬ ‫ رﻏـم اﻟـﺗﻌﻠﯾم واﻹﻋـﻼم اﻟـﻣﺿﻠل! دي ﺗـﺣﯾﺔ ﻣـن أدﯾـب ﻛـﺑﯾر ﻟـﻛم‬,‫وﻣـﺎﺗـﻌرﻓـش دول طـﻠﻌوا ﻛـده إزاى‬ ‫ﯾﺎ ﺷﺑﺎب‬ Bi-al-ams fī ḥalqat “Ākhir Kalām” ‘indamā sa’al Yusrī Fūdah alruwā’ī al-rā’i’ ‘alā’ al-Aṣwānī hal anta mutafā’il raghm kull mā tamurru bihi Miṣr? Fa radda ‘alā’ al-Aṣwānī bi-igābah rā’i‘ah ḥaythu dhakara anna guz’ min tafā’ulih bi-sababikum antum waqāl: tandahish innak tishuf shabāb yuṭālib bi-il-taghyīr, wi-yuṭālib bi-ḥuqūquh, wi-māti‘rafsh do:l ṭil’ū kidah izzāy, raghm il-ta’līm wiil-i’lām il-muḍallil! Dī taḥīyah min adīb kibīr li-kum yā shabāb Translation: Yesterday in the episode of ‘Latest words’ when [the presenter] Yosri Fouda asked the brilliant novelist Alaa Al Aswani ‘are you optimistic despite all that Egypt is going through?’ Alaa Al Aswani gave a brilliant response and mentioned that part of his optimism is because of you (pl.) when he said: It’s amazing to see young people demanding change, and demanding their rights, and you wonder how they became this way, in spite of the misleading education and media! This is is a salute to you guys from a great writer In another example of a direct quote below, the quote in MSA is stated in the first line, followed by a description of the content in the second line, also in MSA. There is a line break before the next part, indicating the code-switch to CWA, also signalled by the spelling of ‫ إﺳــــﻣـﻌـوه‬with a hamzah, since it would be written without in fuṣḥá. This matches the switch in content from a description of the video, to an appeal to the reader to watch (‘listen to’) it: - 140 ! Example 5.41 ‫ وﻟﺳﺎن اﻟﺧﯾﺎﻧﺔ ﯾﺧرس‬,‫ ﺗﻧدﻟﻊ اﻟﻧﺎر إن ﺗﺗﻧ ّﻔس‬,‫ﻋﻧدﻣﺎ ﯾﻣﻸ اﻟﺣق ﻗﻠﺑك‬ ‫دﻛﺗور ﻣﺣﻣد اﻟﺑرادﻋﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺣدﯾث راﺋﻊ وﻟﮭﺟﺗﮫ ﺿد اﻟﻧظﺎم ﺗﻌﻠو ﺑﺣﻛﻣﺔ ﻻ ﻟﺑس ﻓﯾﮭﺎ‬ ‫ ﺣﺎﺟﺎت ﻗرﺑﻧﺎ ﻧﻧﺳﺎھﺎ‬,‫ ﺑﯾﺗﻛﻠم ﻋن اﻟﻣﻘﺎوﻣﺔ وﻋن اﻹﻧﺳﺎﻧﯾﺔ واﻟﺣﯾﺎة اﻟﻛرﯾﻣﺔ‬..‫إﺳﻣﻌوه‬ ‘indamā yamla’ al-ḥaqq qalbuk, tandali‘ al-nār in tatanaffas, walisān al-khīyānah yakhras Duktūr Muḥammad al-Barad‘ī fī ḥadīth rā’i‘ wa-lahgatuh ḍidd alniẓām ta‘lū bi-ḥikmah lā labs fīhā Isma’ūh.. biyitkallim ‘an il-muqawmah wi-‘an il-insānīyah wi-il-ḥayāh il-karīmah, ḥāgāt qarrabnā ninsāhā Translation: When truth fills your heart, fire breaks out if [when] you breathe, and the tongue of dishonesty becomes mute Dr Mohamed ElBaradei in a brilliant talk, his tone becoming sterner towards the regime, his words wise and clear Listen to [watch] it [the video], he talks about resistance, humanity and living with dignity, things we have almost forgotten An example of using context to determine the style of an ambiguous or ‘bivalent’ sentence is seen below, where the first sentence can be read as either MSA or CWA, until the final word ً‫‘( ﻗــــﺎﺋــــﻼ‬saying’), which is clearly MSA, and renders the sentence MSA. There is a clear switch indicated by the use of ellipses to the direct quote in CWA: Example 5.42 ‫ ﻣـﻊ إن‬,‫ ﻓـﺿﻠﺗوا ﺗـﻘوﻟـوﻟـﻲ ﻓـﻛر ﺟـدﯾـد ﻓـﻛر ﺟـدﯾـد‬..ً‫وھـﻧﺎ إﺣـﺗﺞ اﻟـرﺋـﯾس ﻋـﻠﻰ ﺗـزوﯾـر اﻹﻧـﺗﺧﺎﺑـﺎت ﻗـﺎﺋـﻼ‬ ‫اﻟﻔﻛر اﻟﻘدﯾم ﻛﺎن ﺷﻐﺎل زى اﻟﺣﻼوة ﯾﺎ ﺷوﯾﺔ أﻏﺑﯾﺎ‬ Wa-hunā iḥtagga al-ra’is ‘alá tazwīr al-intikhābāt qā’ilan.. faḍaltū tuqūlūlī fikr gidīd fikr gidid, ma‘ in il-fikr il-qadīm kān shaghghāl zayy il-halāwah yā shwayit aghbīyā Translation: And here the president protests the election fraud saying ‘You kept telling me [about] new thought, new thought, although the old thought was working just fine you idiots’ - 141 ! - Another example below shows use of MSA marked at the end by the use of double exclamation marks, followed by a sarcastic remark in CWA: Example 5.43 6 ‫ﻓـﻲ ﺗﺣـﻠﯾل ﻋـﺑﻘري ﻗـﺎل ﻋـﺑد ﷲ ﻛـﻣﺎل )رﺋـﯾس ﺗﺣـرﯾـر روزاﻟـﯾوﺳـف اﻟـﺣﻛوﻣـﯾﺔ( أن ﻋـﻠم ﺷـﺑﺎب‬ ‫ واﻟـﻘﺑﺿﺔ ﻓـﻲ ھـذا اﻟـﻌﻠم‬,‫ اﻟـﻠون اﻷﺳـود ﻓـﯾﮫ ﯾـدل ﻋـﻠﻰ ﻋـودة اﻟﺟـﻣﺎﻋـﺎت اﻹﺳـﻼﻣـﯾﺔ اﻟـﺗﻛﻔﯾرﯾـﺔ‬,‫أﺑـرﯾـل‬ :))) ‫ أﻟف ﻣﺑروك‬..‫رﻣز ﻓﺎﺷﻲ!! ﯾﻌﻧﻲ إﺣﻧﺎ ﺗﻛﻔﯾرﯾﯾن ﻓﺎﺷﯾﯾن ﯾﺎ ﺷﺑﺎب‬ Fī taḥlīl ‘abqarī qāla ‘abd Allāh Kamāl (ra’īs tahrīr Rūz al-Yūsuf alḥukūmīyah) anna ‘alam Shabāb 6 Abrīl, al-lawn al-aswad fīh yadullu ‘ala ‘awdat al-gāmi‘āt al-Islāmīyah al-takfīrīyah, wa-alqabḍah fī hādha al-‘alam ramz fāshī!! Ya’nī iḥnā takfīrīyīn fāshīyīn yā shabāb.. alf mabrūk :))) Translation: In a genius analysis Aballah Kamal (editor in chief of the nationalised publication Rose Yousef) said that black colour of the 6 April Youth banner signifies the return of the Islamist ‘Takfiri’ (accusing others of apostasy) groups, and that the fist is a symbol of fascism! So we are fascist Takfiris, congratulations guys :))) 5.3.2.5 Opinion polls and surveys Whereas these mainly appeared in MSA pre-December 2010, they begin to appear in CWA as per the following examples: Example 5.44 ‫اﯾﮫ اﻛﺗر ھﺗﺎف ﺑﻌد اﻟﺛورة ﺑـ ﺗردده ﻓﻲ ﻣﻠﯾوﻧﯾﺔ او ﻣﺳﯾرة او ﻣظﺎھرة؟‬ ‫( ﯾﺳﻘط ﯾﺳﻘط ﺣﻛم اﻟﻌﺳﻛر‬+2k) Masra7ia Masra7ia wel 3esabah hia hia (234 people) ‫ﯾﺎ اھﺎﻟﯾﻧﺎ اﻧﺿﻣو ﻟﯾﻧﺎ‬ ‫( اﻟﺷﻌب واﻟﺟﯾش اﯾد واﺣدة‬+84) ‫( ﯾﺎ ﻧﺟﯾب ﺣﻘﮭم ﯾﺎ ﻧﻣوت زﯾﮭم‬+65) […] [Dated 21 October 2011] - 142 ! - E:h aktar hitāf ba‘d il-thawrah bi traddiduh fī milyunīah aw masīrah aw muẓāhrah? (+2k) yasquṭ yasquṭ ḥukm il-‘askar (234 people) Masraḥīya Masraḥīya wi-il ‘iṣābah hiyya hiyya (+84) il-sha‘b wi-il-ge:sh īd waḥdah (+65) ya nigīb haqquhum ya nimūt zayyuhum […] Translation: Which chant do you repeat the most in a million-march, demonstration, or protest? Down down with military rule (+2k) A play [show], a play, and the mob is the same (234 people) Our families, join us The people and the army are one hand [united] (+84) - 143 ! Either we get justice for them or we die like them (+65) […] The numbers in the post refer to the number of responses, or votes, and are added automatically by Facebook as the members vote. The use of a Romanised form of Arabic for one of the responses (chants) is interesting, since use of non-Arabic script is unusual on the group’s Facebook page. It may indicate that responses were added by more than one person, the users themselves for example, or were ‘copy and pasted’ as options from elsewhere (perhaps sent in as suggestions by the members). Example 5.45 ‫ ﻣـﺎ ھـو ﺗـﻘﯾﯾﻣك ﻷداء رﺋـﯾس اﻟـوزراء دﻛـﺗور ﻋـﺻﺎم ﺷـرف‬،‫ﻓـﻲ ﺿـوء ﺣـرﻛـﺔ اﻟـﻣﺣﺎﻓـظﯾن اﻷﺧـﯾرة‬ ‫ﻣﻧذ ﺗوﻟﯾﮫ اﻟﻣﺳؤوﻟﯾﺔ وﺣﺗﻰ اﻟﻠﺣظﺔ؟‬ ‫ﻟﻸﺳف وﺣش‬ 1,254 votes ‫ﻋظﯾﻣﺔ ﯾﺎ ﻣﺻر ﯾﺎ ارض اﻟﻠواء‬ 467 votes ‫ﻣﺗوﺳط‬ 411 votes ‫ﯾرﯾد اﻟﺧﯾر ﻟﻛﻧﮫ ﻣﻐﻠوب ﻋﻠﻰ أﻣره‬ 119 votes […] [Dated 4 August 2011] Fī ḍaw’ ḥarakat al-muḥāfiẓīn il-akhīrah, mā huwa taqyīmak/ik li-adā’ ra’īs al-wuzarā’ Duktūr ‘isām Sharaf mundhu tawalīh almas’ūlīyah wa-ḥatta al-lahẓah? lil-asaf wiḥish (1,254 votes) ‘aẓīmah ya Maṣr ya arḍ il-liwā’ (467 votes) mutawassiṭ (411 votes) yurīdu al-khayr lākinnahu maghlūb ‘alá amrih (119 votes) […] - 144 ! Translation: In light of the latest move by the Conservatives, what is your take on Prime Minister Essam Sharaf’s performance since he took on his role until now? Unfortunately it’s bad (1,254 votes) Egypt, the General’s Land, is great (467 votes) Mediocre (411 votes) He wants what’s best but there’s not much he can do (119 votes) […] It is interesting that in this post we see the main question in MSA, followed by the responses in various styles: CWA, IA (bivalent) and MSA. This reflects the earlier post in this category and may indicate multiple contributors, or simply a flexibility of styles, since the styles are consistent within each response, i.e. no code switches to CWA are identified in the MSA response, and vice versa. In terms of motivations for language use, a correlation emerges between the content and style of each response. The first and most popular response, expresses regret that Egypt is doing badly and the sense of regret is reflected in the use of CWA, which as we have seen is used to express emotive language. The second response can be described as bivalent IA, reflecting a clever subversion in the use of the phrase ‫( ارض اﻟــــﻠـواء‬arḍ il-liwā’, ‘the General’s Land’), as it is a reference to a run down area of Cairo and would be pronounced as ‫( اﻟـﻠوا‬illiwa) with a shortening of the final long alif and omission of the hamza. The use of it here to describe Egypt juxtaposes the greatness of Egypt with the run down land of the General, as well as being a reference to the role of the military as the ‘owner’ of the land/country. The use of IA subverts the language of power and authority in order to mock it. The third response ‫( ﻣــﺗوﺳــط‬mutawassiṭ, ‘Mediocre’ or literally ‘middle’) makes use of MSA/IA in that it reflects the non-emotive response, and use of the term itself can be considered MSA with specific uses in CWA (for example ‘a mediocre student’, ‘the middle class’ in society), so it is akin to comparing his performance to a mediocre student, and finally the fourth response in in MSA gives it a factual air - that he does indeed mean well, but is - 145 ! powerless to do or change much. The clever subversion of language and meaning here shows how powerful the choice of style can be in conveying emotion, subversion and mockery, neutrality, and even fact. 5.3.2.6 Slogans The following examples relate to the protests in support of the 6 April 2009 Mahallah textile workers’ strike. The language use is CWA, with many bivalent IA features. However, the absence of any strictly MSA terms lends the overall language use in this category towards an elevated form of CWA. In the final example, we see a rare instance of use of English in a post, which indicates a message intended for an international audience [clearly CWA terms underlined for clarity]: Example 5.46 ‫ﻣﺎﺗﺳﺑش ﺣﻘك ﺷﺎرك وﻛﻔﺎﯾﺔ ﺳﻠﺑﯾﺔ اﻟﻠﻰ ﺑﯾﺣﺻل ﻓﻰ ﺑﻠدﻧﺎ ﻣش ﺷوﯾﺔ‬ [Dated 20 March 2009] Matsibsh ḥaqqak shārik wi-kifāyah salbīyah illī bīyiḥṣal fī baladnā mish shuwayyah Don’t forgo your right, take part and enough with the passiveness, what’s happening in our country is not insignificant Example 5.47 ‫ ﺣﻘﻧﺎ و ھﻧﺎﺧده‬..2009 ‫ إﺑرﯾل‬6 ..‫إﺿـراب ﻋـﺎم ﻟﺷـﻌـب ﻣـﺻـر‬ [Dated 21 March 2009] Iḍrāb ‘ām li-sha‘b Maṣr.. 6 Abrīl 2009.. ḥaqqinā wi-hanākhduh General strike for the people of Egypt… 6 April 2009… our right and we will take it Example 5.48 ‫ إﺑـــرﯾـــل‬6 ‫ إﺿـــراب‬...‫ ﻓـــ ّﻛــر ﻓـﻰ ﻋــﯾــﺷـــﺗــك اﻟـﻣُــرة‬...‫ﻓـــ ّﻛــر ﻓـﻰ ﺑـــﻠــدك ﻟـو َﻣـــرة‬ ‫ ﺣــﻘــﻧــﺎ و ھــﻧــﺎﺧــده‬..2009 [Dated 21 March 2009] - 146 ! Fakkar fī baladak law marrah… fakkar fī ‘īshtak il-murrah… iḍrāb 6 Abril 2009… ḥaqqinā wi-hanākhduh Think of your country for once, think of your bitter life, 6 April 2009 strike… our right and we will take it Example 5.49 ‫ إﻋﻣل ﺻـــــــــــــــــــــــــــوت‬..‫ ﻛﻠﻛِـــــــــــس‬..‫ ﺧﺑّـــــــــــط‬..‫ ﺻ ّﻔــــــــــــــر‬..‫زﻣّـــــــــــر‬ Zammar.. ṣaffar.. khabbaṭ.. kalkis.. i‘mil ṣo:t Toot your horn, whistle, bang, beep, make a sound [make some noise] Example 5.50 Down with Mubarak.. 6th of April'09.. a general strike & protest in Egypt - against the corrupted regime of Mubarak's family... ‫ ﺣــﻘــﻧــﺎ و ھــﻧــﺎﺧــده‬2009.. ‫ إﺑــرﯾــل‬6 ‫إﺿــراب‬ [Both dated 31 March 2009] […] Iḍrāb 6 Abril 2009… ḥaqinā wi-hanākhduh 6 April 2009 strike… our right and we will take it Overall we have seen in this chapter the styles outlined in the previous chapter applied consistently and with identifiable patterns of use that relate back to the content. In MSA posts, we have seen the traditional uses for mainly factual, non-emotive and authoritative content, while CWA is used mostly for humorous and emotive content. Where mixing has been found, it correlates closely to shifts in tone and content, with the use of transitional, IA (bivalent/mixed) to soften the shift between the two. The code-switching patterns are largely fuṣḥá to ‘āmmīyah and mainly intersentential. The vast majority of posts are written in Arabic script, with very few instances of English and Romanised script. The ease of use of both fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah shows a fluency in and high level of comfort with both, and the fluidity between the two shows that the group are skilled navigators between the two. Switching and mixing has been shown to - 147 ! follow regular and predictable patterns, rather than being random and haphazard. Spelling conventions are largely fuṣḥá, with deliberate switches to more phonetically ‘āmmīyah spellings, often within the same post, to highlight the switch in style and content. In the following chapter, we further explore mixed language use, by reviewing other studies found looking at mixed language use online in blogs, on Twitter, and in print satirical writing, and comparing their findings with the findings of this study. - 148 ! - Chapter 6 Comparative review of mixed-style studies In this chapter, the findings of three studies looking at mixed Arabic use are compared with the findings of this study and viewed through the lens of the proposed theoretical framework. The dialect in the three studies is Egyptian (Cairene). Two of the studies are concerned specifically with online texts: Ramsay (2012) analyses the language use of five prominent online blogs, while Kosoff (2014) analyses the tweets of ten prominent Twitter accounts. The blogs in Ramsay (2012) are all written in Arabic script, and the study looks at instances of code-switching between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah, while the tweets in Kosoff (2014) employ Arabic script as well as Romanised Arabic and even English. For the purposes of comparison with the findings of this study, only examples of codeswitching between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah in Arabic script have been considered. The third and final study (Håland, 2017) looks at codeswitching in satirical works, the findings of which are reviewed in light of the theoretical framework proposed in Chapter 5 above. 6.1 Online blogs (Ramsay, 2012) Ramsay (2012) analyses the language use of five prominent online Egyptian bloggers: Wael Abbas, a human rights and democracy activist since 2004 (misrdigital.blogspirit.com); Nawara Negm, a nationalist activist and open critic of the Mubarak regime, and the only female blogger included in the study (tahyyes.blogspot.com); Ahmed Shokeir, a liberal activist with an entertaining/educating angle to his blog (shokeir.blogspot.com); Abdel Moneim Mahmoud, a former member of the Muslim Brotherhood whose blog informs readers about the ideas, standpoints and actions of the Brotherhood (ana-ikhwan.blogspot.com); and Ashraf al-Anany, a bedouin from Sinai who blogs about bedouin life and their mistreatment at the hands of the Egyptian government (his blog has been closed as per Ramsay 2012; 56). The five top-rated bloggers are all critical of Egyptian society, and each of them represents a different viewpoint and section of it. Similarly to this study, the bloggers all blog in Arabic, in Arabic script. - 149 ! In order to compare Ramsay’s (ibid.) findings with those of this study, one of the examples of the study is reexamined here. The example is from the blogger Wael Abbas, who worked as a journalist for several media outlets and as such ‘commands MSA with ease’ (Ramsay, 2012, p.57). Nonetheless, he chooses to write in ‘āmmīyah “as an act of resistance” since fuṣḥá is “the language of the elite, the intelligence... It’s the language of the Koran…” (Ramsay, 2012, p.57). Abbas views the diglossic situation of Arabic as having a negative effect on democracy, since it is not understood by all sections of society. Despite Abbas’s criticism of fuṣḥá, he does appear to employ it in his blog, although borrowing from and mixing with ‘āmmīyah as will be discussed below. Ramsay describes Abbas‘s language use as ”ECA [Egyptian Colloquial Arabic] and a mixed variety“ (Ramsay, 2012, p.58). Abbas‘s posts, similarly to 6 April‘s, include ”video clips and images such as photos, posters and cartoons while texts may function as captions or a request to comment on the imagery“ (Ramsay, 2012, p.57). Abbas’s use of ‘āmmīyah can also be compared to 6 April Youth Movement’s use of it, but while Abbas uses ‘indecent words and expressions of indecorousness [… including] the ‘low’ language of the marketplace with its billingsgate and vulgarities” (Ramsay, 2012, p.58), relatively few instances of mild profanity are found on the Facebook page of 6th April Youth Movement, and the tone is rather more respectful, even when directing criticism at the regime or their critics. One of the examples from Abbas’s blog is copied below with the translations provided by Ramsay, as well as my own for the parts not included in Ramsay. The text is a blogpost21 titled ‫( اﻟﺗﮭﻣﺔ ﺑﯾدون‬il-Tuhmah bīydawwin, ‘The accusation is he blogs’), which begins with a photo of a laptop under the title, followed by the main text of the blog and finally a poem in CWA by Mayādah Midḥat. Crucially, Ramsay only includes excerpts from the blogpost, so I have copied below the full text of the post, except the poem at the end, since it written by another person and so not directly relevant to the analysis of Abbass‘s particular writing style. The poem does, 21 http://misrdigital.blogspirit.com/archive/2009/08/index.html. Last accessed on 26 August 2018. - 150 ! however, add to the sense of seamless blending of fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah within the same text, showing how each can be used separately and together, to form layers and shades of meaning and emotion. The main text under the photo begins with a caption of the photo, which is omitted in Ramsay but is included here as it is found to be an important part of contextualising the whole post and the use and subversion of language within it. So while Ramsay begins the example after the photo caption, I have included it here to illustrate a fuller view of the type of language mixing occurring in the post. I have added bold highlighting to the initial sentence, which I argue can be read as beginning with the ’caption‘ in MSA followed by a switch to CWA, signalled by the use of parenthesis (a common technique identified in this study above). I provide an explanation for this analysis below, and note that starting a post in MSA and switching to CWA is another common technique identified in the FB posts in Chapter 5 above. I have also underlined the two borrowed words from English and ‘āmmīyah that Ramsay points out. The text reads as follows: ‫ ﻛـﻧت ﻟـﺳﮫ ﺷـﺎرﯾـﮫ ﺟـدﯾـد ﻣـﺎ ﺑـﻘﺎﻟـﯾش ﻛـﺎم ﺷﮭـر ﻟـﻛن‬- ‫ﺻـورة أرﺷـﯾﻔﯾﺔ ﻟـﻠﻣﺄﺳـوف ﻋـﻠﻰ ﺷـﺑﺎﺑـﮫ‬ ‫ ﻻب ﺗـوﺑـﻲ اﻟـذي ﯾـﻘﺑﻊ ﻓـﻲ ﻣـﻛﺎن ﻣـﺎ ﻓـﻲ أﺣـد ﻣـﻘرات ﻣـﺑﺎﺣـث أﻣـن اﻟـدوﻟـﺔ‬- ‫ﯾظﮭـر آﺧـد ﻋـﯾن ﺟـﺎﻣـدة‬ ‫ﺑـﻌد أن ﻗـﺎم دﻻدﯾـل وﺣـراﻣـﯾﺔ وﻧـﺻﺎﺑـﯾن ﻣـﺻﻠﺣﺔ اﻟﺟـﻣﺎرك ﺑـﻣﺻﺎدرﺗـﮫ وﺳـرﻗـﺗﮫ ﺑـﺄواﻣـر ﻣـن ﺧـوﻻت‬ ‫أﻣـن اﻟـدوﻟـﺔ ﺑـزﻋـم ﻋـرﺿـﮫ ﻋـﻠﻰ اﻟـﻣﺻﻧﻔﺎت اﻟـﻔﻧﯾﺔ ﻓـﻲ ﺳـﺎﺑـﻘﺔ ھـﻲ اﻷوﻟـﻰ ﻣـن ﻧـوﻋـﮭﺎ ﻓـﻲ ﻣـﺻر وﻟـم‬ ‫ﯾـﺳﻣﻊ ﻋـﻧﮭﺎ أﺣـد ﻣـن ﻗـﺑل وﻋـﻠﻰ اﻟـرﻏـم ﻣـن ذﻟـك ﺗـﻧﻔﻲ اﻟـﻣﺻﻧﻔﺎت اﻟـﻔﻧﯾﺔ ﺗـﻠﻘﯾﮭم ﻟـﺟﮭﺎزي ﻣـن‬ ‫اﻟﺟـﻣﺎرك ﻧـﮭﺎﺋـﯾﺎ رﻏـم ﻣـﺻﺎدرﺗـﮫ ﻣـﻧذ ﺣـواﻟـﻲ ﺷﮭـرﯾـن ﺑـﯾﻧﻣﺎ أﺧـﺑرﺗـﻧﺎ ﻣـﺻﺎدر داﺧـﻠﯾﺔ ﻣـوﺛـوﻗـﺔ ﻓـﻲ‬ ‫ﺟـﮭﺎز اﻟﺷـرطـﺔ أن اﻟـﻼﺑـﺗوب اﻵن ﻓـﻲ ﺣـوذة ﻣـﺑﺎﺣـث اﻣـن اﻟـدوﻟـﺔ ﺑـﺎﻟـﻣﺧﺎﻟـﻔﺔ ﻟـﻠﻘواﻧـﯾن واﻟـدﺳـﺗور‬ ‫ﺑــﺈﻋــﺗﺑﺎره ﺟــﮭﺎز إﺗــﺻﺎل ﯾﺣــﻣﯾﮫ اﻟــدﺳــﺗور واﻟــﻘواﻧــﯾن اﻟــﺗﻲ ﺗﺣــظر اﻟــﺗﺻﻧت واﻹطــﻼع ﻋــﻠﻰ‬ ‫ﺧﺻوﺻﯾﺎت اﻟﻣواطﻧﯾن وﺳﺎھﻣت ﻣﺻﻠﺣﺔ اﻟﺟﻣﺎرك ﺑدور ﻗذر ﻓﻲ ھذه اﻟﺟرﯾﻣﺔ‬ Ṣūrah arshīfīyyah lil-ma’sūf ‘alá shabābih - kunt lissah shārīh gidīd mā baqālīsh kām shahr lākin yiẓhar akhad ‘īn gāmdah lāb tūbbī alladhī yaqba‘ fī makān mā fī aḥad maqarrāt mabāḥith amn al-dawlah ba‘da ann qāma dalādīl wa-ḥarāmīyyat wanaṣṣābīn maṣlaḥat al-gamārik bi-muṣādaratih wa-sariqatih biawāmir min khawalāt amn al-dawlah bi-za‘m ‘arḍih ‘alá almuṣannafāt al-fannīyah fī sābiqah hiya al-ūlá min naw‘ihā fī Miṣr wa-lam yasma‘ ‘anhā aḥad min qabl wa-‘alá al-raghm min dhālik - 151 ! tanfī al-muṣannafāt al-fannīyah tulqīhim li-jihāzī min al-jamārik niha’īyyan raghm muṣādaratih mundhu ḥawālī shahrayn baynamā akhbaratnā maṣādir dākhilīyah mawthūqah fī jihāz alshurṭah anna al-lābtūb al-ān fī ḥawdhat mabāḥith amn al-dawlah bi-al-mukhālafah lil-qawānīn wa-al-dustūr bi-i‘tibārih jihāz ittiṣāl yaḥmīh al-dustūr wa-al-qawānīn allatī taḥẓur al-taṣannut wa-aliṭṭilā‘ ‘alá khuṣūṣīyāt al-mūwāṭinīn wa-sāhamat maṣlaḥat aljamārik bi-dawr qadhir fī hādhihi al-jarīmah Translation: An archival photo of the regrettably young thing I’d just bought it new barely a few months ago but it seems the evil eye had struck - my laptop that is now crouching in some corner in one of the state security investigation centres after the minions, thieves and swindlers of the customs authority sequestered and stole it on the authority of the state security bastards, claiming that they were going to display it in the technical section as the first of its kind in Egypt that no-one has heard of before. Despite this the technical section flatly denies that they have received my computer from the customs authority, even though it was confiscated it two months ago. Meanwhile our police sources informed us that the laptop is now in the possession of state security illegally, since it is a communications device which the constitution and laws protects by banning the tapping and examining of citizen’s privacy. The customs authority played a big part in this crime. The poem follows the text, written entirely in CWA. Ramsay describes Abbas‘s general style as ECA/mixed, and notes that “[t]hroughout his blog the narratives of his posts are posited on the two basic foundation stones of familiarization and officialdom, the first attracting the reader‘s sympathy and the second prompting his or her indignation.” (Ramsay, 2012, p. 59). This seems to be true of this particular post, where the post begins with the ’obituary‘ of the ’young‘ laptop‘ and a lament of what happened in CWA to familiarise and attract the sympathy of the reader, followed by the ’official‘ report of what happened in MSA, prompting the reader‘s indignation. A full reexamination of this text reveals patterns consistent with those identified in Chapter 5 above, as follows: the first part, highlighted in bold, can be further divided into two subparts, separated by - 152 ! the parenthesis - beginning in MSA (or even IA since the terms are all technically bivalent, or shared forms) and switching at the parenthesis to CWA. The former, left out of Ramsay’s analysis, can be seen as the caption of the photo, describing the laptop in it. We have seen previously in this study two types of photo captions - the neutral, informative caption simply describing in a neutral way the content of the photo or video and usually written in MSA; and the commentary type, which gives a reaction to the content of the photo or video. The use of MSA here is consistent with its use for photo captions as we have seen in Chapter 5 above, since it factually states that it is ‘an archival photo’. Further, the language style itself is journalistic - ‫( ﺻورة أرﺷﯾﻔﯾﺔ‬ṣūrah arshīfīyyah,‘an archival photo‘) and ‫( ﻣﺄﺳوف ﻋﻠﻰ ﺷﺑﺎﺑﮫ‬ma’sūf ‘alá shabābih, ‘regrettably young‘), which is a common expression used in obituaries when the deceased is young. The CWA style of the latter parenthetical phrase is identified as such by Ramsay owing to the use of the ‘āmmīyah words ‫( ﻟﺳﮫ‬lissah, ‘just’), which can be considered a lexical variant of ‘āmmīyah since it is not used in fuṣḥá; ‫( ما ﺑﻘﺎﻟﯾش‬mā baqālīsh, ‘barely’), a grammatical variant, according to Ramsay, of the fuṣḥá ‫( ما بقي لي‬mā baqīya lī); and ‫( ﻛﺎم‬kām, ‘a few’), a phonological variant of the fuṣḥá ‫( ﻛم‬kam) - although these grammatical and phonological variants are not used in fuṣḥá to the same meaning or effect, further lending the classification of this part to CWA. The switch to CWA in the parenthetical phrase is consistent with a switch to the ‘commentary’ on the photo, giving the additional information that it was purchased only recently, and the colloquialism about it being a victim of the ‘evil eye’ to attract the sympathy of the reader. The use of journalistic language and expressions in the first part lends it to an MSA reading, and the switch to CWA coincides with a switch from the essential or factual information, to an emotive commentary on it. The switch is also highlighted typographically, through the use of parenthesis, another common technique highlighted in Chapter 5 above. After the parenthetical CWA phrase, we see another switch, this time to MSA for the remainder of the text. The use of non-fuṣḥá items in this part of the text can be can be seen as borrowings: from a foreign language such as the case of ‫( ﻻب ﺗوﺑﻲ‬lāb tūbbī, ‘my laptop’) from the English ‘laptop’ since it - 153 ! is a technological term, and this form of technical borrowing has been observed before in online writing, in Chapter 5 above; or from ‘āmmīyah such as the the second word ‫( دﻻدﯾل‬dalādīl, ‘minions’), its unapologetic use seamlessly woven into the text to heighten the reader’s sense of indignation and anger towards the culprits of the stolen laptop. In terms of the content, it is in the style of a report documenting serious accusations against state authorities, and so the use of MSA is more fitting to this type of content, and corresponds to the use of MSA for ‘official’ Facebook posts by the 6th April Youth Movement group, as seen in Chapter 5 above. Overall the mixed style identified by Ramsay can be said to correspond to the IA style presented in the proposed theoretical framework of this study, employing similar techniques and motivations for switching and mixing between CWA and MSA. Although it is beyond the scope of this study to reexamine all of the examples of blogs in Ramsay’s study, Ramsay’s overall findings are found to be consistent with those of this study: the language use of the online bloggers is found to include both MSA and CWA, which was found to be true of the Facebook case study, with similar techniques and motivations employed in their respective use. Further, Ramsay concludes that the bloggers’ use of mixed code is not due to a lack of proficiency in MSA, rather they use it strategically to suit the aims of their message and are able to manipulate and even subvert its traditional and appropriated use by the authorities, for maximum rhetorical effect. These findings echo the findings of this study, that uses of Arabic online, particularly among young, influential political activists, are varied but not random, and that they navigate freely among the various forms of Arabic out of linguistic confidence rather than a lack of command of MSA. More recently several prominent blogs have been published online and it has been identified as an area for further comparison and study, including the blogs of Nael Eltoukhy22 and Ahmed Naji23. 22 23 http://hkzathdthcohen.blogspot.com h t t p s : / / w w w. f a c e b o o k . c o m / a h n a j e a h m e d / ? _ _ t n _ _ = % 2 C d % 2 C P R & e i d = A R D j e a Y g w x N z t 3 M u i 0 7 W V 4 8 9 K j N F D s FVvnxJXj4DpVE_t5CUYTlvX30D3XIy9kKkwsG5AoOiHCHqi5L - 154 ! - 6.2 Twitter (Kosoff, 2014) Kosoff’s (2014) analysis of tweets from ten prominent Arabic twitter users between October and November 2011 looked at instances of codeswitching between Arabic (fuṣḥá, Egyptian ‘āmmīyah and Romanised Arabic ‘Arabizi’ (both fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah)) and English, as well between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah. It is the interest in instances of code-switching between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah that is shared between this study and Kosoff’s study, and her examples are reanalysed here in light of the proposed theoretical framework for Egyptian Arabic writing, with the style of each tweet analysed as either MSA, IA or CWA. The similarities between this study and Kosoff’s lie in the use of a qualitative approach and of observation to describe the sociolinguistic situation found in the respective speech communities (Kosoff, 2014; 83), as well as the use of social media as a medium for observation. The differences, however, are the different media channels chosen (this study focuses on Facebook while Kosoff’s focus is on Twitter), and the choice of coding between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah. While both studies have acknowledged that there are distinctive language features in fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah respectively that enable each of them to be coded clearly as either fuṣḥá or ‘āmmīyah, there are a number of words that are common to both varieties (often only distinguishable by unwritten short vowels that would only be clear in an oral delivery of the word) and are therefore ambiguous. It is this latter category that has been treated differently in the two studies, as detailed below. In Kosoff (2014, p.92), she cites ‘Example 5’ as an example of a mixed-code (fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah) tweet from the popular Egyptian singer Hamza Namira: ‫ﻟـو ﻛـﺎن ﻣـرور اﻟـﻘﺎھـرة رﺟـﻼً ﻟﺣﺑﺳـﺗﮫ ف ﺟـراج ﻣـﻠﯾﺎن ﺗـرﯾـﻠﻼت ﻣـﻘﻔول وﻣـﻔﯾﮭوش وﻻ ﺷـﺑﺎك‬ ‫واﻟﺷﻛﻣﻧﺎت ف ﻣﻧﺎﺧﯾره واﻟﻛﻼﻛﺳﺎت ف ودﻧﮫ ﻟﺣدﻣﺎﯾﻣوت ﺑﺈﺳﻔوﺧﺻﯾﺎ اﻟﺧﻧق‬ Law kān murūr al-Qāhirah rajulan la-ḥabastuh f garāj malyān tirīllāt maqfūl wi-mafīhūsh wa-lā shibbāk wi-il-shakmanāt f manākhīruh wi-il-kalāksāt f widnuh la-ḥadd mā yimūt bi-isfukhṣīyā il-khanq - 155 ! [Kosoff’s translation:] If Cairo traffic was a man, I would imprison him in a locked garage full of trucks and that doesn't have any windows and [there would be] exhaust in his nose and honking in his ears until he died from asphyxia Kosoff rightly identifies the language of this tweet as a mix of fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah, classifying individual words as either fuṣḥá or ‘āmmīyah, for example the word ً‫( رﺟﻼ‬rajulan, ‘a man’) is clearly fuṣḥá while the word ‫( ﻣﻠﯾﺎن‬malyān, ‘full’) is ‘āmmīyah. Kosoff does not go further than labelling individual words as either fuṣḥá or ‘āmmīyah, and does not analyse the context, motivation or patterns of code-switching in this tweet. Based on the observations of this study and applying them to Kosoff’s example, the code-mixing found in the tweet is not random but rather follows the same pattern of starting the utterance (in this case the tweet) in fuṣḥá, followed by a clear orthographic switch to ‘āmmīyah. In the first example, the beginning of the tweet is clearly fuṣḥá as identified by Kosoff: ‫ﻟو ﻛﺎن ﻣرور‬ ‫( اﻟﻘﺎھرة رﺟﻼً ﻟﺣﺑﺳﺗﮫ‬law kān murūr al-Qāhirah rajulan la-ḥabastuh, ‘If Cairo traffic was a man, I would imprison him’), which can be considered a complete, stand-alone phrase in itself as it is complete in meaning. It also seems to be a play on the fuṣḥá saying: ‫( ﻟو ﻛﺎن اﻟﻔﻘر رﺟﻼ ﻟﻘﺗﻠﺗﮫ‬law kān al-faqr rajulan la-qataltuh, ‘if poverty were a man, I would kill him’). It is therefore plausible that the code-switch occurs at the abbreviated form ‫ ف‬/f/ for the word ‫( ﻓﻲ‬fī, ‘in’), since the rest of the tweet is clearly ‘āmmīyah and is identified as such by Kosoff. Accordingly, this tweet can be seen to follow the same pattern observed in this study of inter-sentential codeswitching from fuṣḥá to ‘āmmīyah. As for the motivation behind the switch, the fuṣḥá part can at the beginning be seen to be a statement, almost factual and devoid of sentiment, followed by an elaborate, impassioned message that expresses the tweeter’s hatred for Cairo traffic. It can be said that this tweet is written in an IA style, due to the seamless use of both fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah in complete, stand-alone sentences. Kosoff cites a second example, ‘Example 6’, of a mixed-code (fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah) tweet by the same singer: - 156 ! ‫طﺎﻟﻣﺎ اﻟﺗﻠﻔزﯾون اﻟﻣﺻري ﻧﻔﻰ اﻹﺳﺗﻘﺎﻟﺔ ﯾﺑﻘﻰ ﺷرف اﺳﺗﻘﺎل ﻓﻌﻼ‬ Ṭālamā il-tilifizyūn il-Maṣrī nafá il-istiqālah yibqá Sharaf istaqāl fi‘lan [Kosoff’s translation:] As long as Egyptian television denies the resignation, then Sharif has actually resigned In this second example, Kosoff identifies only one word ‫( ﯾﺑﻘﻰ‬yibqá, ‘then’) as ‘āmmīyah, while the rest she identifies as fuṣḥá. She concedes that the whole tweet may fall into the highest category of ‘āmmīyah (ESA), but nonetheless categorises it as a mixed tweet, containing all but one fuṣḥá word and the one ‘āmmīyah word. This is another example of classifying individual words as either fuṣḥá or ‘āmmīyah, without taking into account the wider context of the tweet. The fact that all but one word in this tweet fall into the shared group of words that are used in both fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah, renders it an interesting tweet linguistically speaking and a candidate for further inspection. One way of looking at it would be to say, as Kosoff notes, that it can be read as one ‘āmmīyah utterance, since there are no exclusively fuṣḥá words in it, while it does contain an exclusively ‘āmmīyah word ‫( ﯾﺑﻘﻰ‬yibqá, ‘then’). Although she classes it as a high level of ‘āmmīyah, it is ‘āmmīyah nonetheless. Additionally, if we consider the word ‫( طﺎﻟﻣﺎ‬ṭālamā, ‘as long as’) we would expect in fuṣḥá for it to be followed by ‫ أن‬as in ‫طﺎﻟﻣﺎ أن‬ (ṭālamā anna, ‘as long as’). The absence of ‫( أن‬anna, a particle) here further supports the view that the whole tweet can be read as ‘āmmīyah, that is to say that it is written in a CWA style. Alternatively, taking Kosoff’s classification of the tweet as being a mixture of fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah, and looking at it more closely, shows yet again, as this study has shown, that the code-switch is inter-sentential and that the utterance can be divided into two parts: the first part classed as fuṣḥá, while the second part, indicated by the switch at the word ‫ﯾﺑﻘﻰ‬, as ‘āmmīyah. In terms of motivation for this switch, the first part can be seen as the ‘factual’ information being presented in fuṣḥá (the fact that Egyptian television has denied the resignation), followed by the tweeter’s - 157 ! opinion, or speculation, in ‘āmmīyah, that Sharaf has indeed resigned. In this case it would be described as being written in an IA style. This example is important as it highlights the difficulty, at times, in identifying ESA in writing. In speech, many of the shared words between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah can be identified by the way they are pronounced, but when they are identical orthographically, it can be difficult to be sure of the writer’s intention. In such instances, a ‘common sense’ approach may be best, taking context into consideration and making a judgement as to which ‘sounds’ right. Whether the tweet is categorised as CWA or IA, it is important to look at the language of the tweet as a whole and understand the patterns, motivations and implications of code-switching. This study suggests that code-switching between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah in written contexts is not random, and follows an inter-sentential rather than an intra-sentential pattern, usually beginning in fuṣḥá and switching to ‘āmmīyah. Given this, it would be more likely that this particular utterance follows the same pattern, i.e. starting in fuṣḥá followed by a clear switch to ‘āmmīyah, supported by the switch in the content between fact (the resignation was indeed denied) and opinion (that he must have resigned). Taking Kosoff’s rationalisation, if the utterance were read as fuṣḥá, it would sound a little odd with the ‘āmmīyah word ‫( ﯾﺑﻘﻰ‬yibqá, ‘then’) inserted apparently randomly in the middle of a fuṣḥá sentence. If, however, it is read as CWA, it sounds natural and the elevated register is fitting in the context of discussing a national political issue. Kosoff herself argues that it is natural for Namira to use fuṣḥá as well as ‘āmmīyah, and to switch between the two in his tweets, given that his audience is made up of young, well-educated Egyptians who would be familiar with this style of language use. This example highlights the importance of taking into account the wider context, motivation and message of the utterance, rather than simply classifying individual words within the same text as either fuṣḥá or ‘āmmīyah. It also shows that it is impossible to ignore the third category of shared words that at least orthographically if not also phonetically fit into both the fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah categories and could only be made distinguishable by looking at their wider context within the text. - 158 ! - 6.3 Satire (Håland, 2017) Håland (2017) looks at cases of inter-sentential code-switching found in satirical texts, where ‘switching between the varieties appear to be a stylistic device emphasizing a sarcastic comment’ (p. 152). The patterns of and motivations for switching are consistent with the findings of this study. Håland (ibid.) finds the code-switching patterns to be consistent with the description of fuṣḥāmmiyya (Rosenbaum, 2000). In an earlier discussion of fuṣḥāmmiyya, this study has placed it within the LIA style of the proposed theoretical framework, due to to the humorous context in which it appears, as well as the lower-educated readership. The below examples are consistent with the description of the LIA style outlined in Chapter 5 above. Each example in Håland (ibid.) begins with the MSA part of text in black, followed by the switch to CWA highlighted in red, which is changed here to underlining, with a consistent typographical marker in the form of ellipses separating the two codes: Example 1: .. ‫ﻷﻧﮭﺎ ﻛده ﻛده ھﺗطﺑﺦ اﻟﻠﻲ ﺑﺗﻌرف ﺗﻌﻣﻠﮫ ﺑس‬.. ‫ﻻ ﺗﺗرك واﻟدﺗك ﺗﺷﺎھد ﻗﻧوات اﻟطﺑﺦ‬ Lā tatruk wālidatuka/i tushāhid qanawāt al-ṭabkh.. l’innahā kidah kidah hatuṭbukh illī biti‘raf ti‘miluh bas Translation: Do not let your mother watch cooking channels… because either way she will only cook what she knows how to make Example 2: .. ‫ واﻟﻧﺎس اﻟﻠﻲ ﺑﺗﻧﺷر اﻟﺟﻣﻠﺔ دي‬،‫ وﻏﺑﺎء اﻟﻺﻧﺳﺎن‬،‫ اﻟـﻛون‬.. ‫ھﻧﺎك ﺛﻼﺛﺔ أﺷﯾﺎء ﻻ ﺣدود ﻟﮭﻣﺎ‬ Hunāka thalāthat ashyā’ lā ḥudūd la-humā .. al-kawn, wa-ghabā’ alinsān, wi-il-nās illī bitinshur il-gumlah dī.. Translation: There are three infinite things… the universe, people’s stupidity, and the people who will share this sentence… - 159 ! Example 3: ‫ وﯾـﻧﺎم ﺑـﻌد ﻣـﺎ ﯾـﺗﻠﻛك ﻋـﻠﻰ أي‬،‫ھـﻲ أﯾـﺿﺎ ًﻣـﺎ ﯾـﻔﻌﻠﮫ اﻟـرﺟـل ﻟـﯾﻠﺔ ﻛـل ﯾـوم ﺧـﻣﯾس ﻋـﺷﺎن ﯾـداري ﺧـﯾﺑﺗﮫ‬ !!‫ﺳﺑب ﻣش ﻣﻧطﻘﻲ وﺧﻼص‬ Hiya ayḍan mā yaf‘aluh al-ragul laylat kull yawm Khamīs ‘ashān yidārī khe:btuh, wi-yinām ba‘d mā yitlaklik ‘alá ayy sabab mish mantiqī wi-khalāṣ! Translation: It is also what the man does every Thursday night to hide his failure, and go to sleep after making a fuss over anything that doesn’t make any sense!! A further example of fuṣḥá̄ mmīyah with an “alternating style” in Egyptian prose texts (Håland, 2017: 153-4) is reproduced below with the original bold highlighting for fuṣḥá words and underlining in place of the original red font for ‘āmmīyah words. Again, without the full context it is hard to make a fully informed judgement, but some initial impressions can be formed from the excerpt provided, as follows: ‫ ﻷن ﻣـﻊ ﻛـل ﻋـﻠﺑﺔ ﻣـﺎﻛـﯾﺎج ﺑـﺗﺑﻘﻰ ﻓـﯾﮫ‬،‫اﻣـﺎ اﻟـﻣراﯾـﺔ ﻓﮭـﻲ اﻟـﻣﻧﺗﺞ اﻷﻛـﺛر إھـدارا ﻓـﻲ ﻋـﺎﻟـم اﻟـﻣﺎﻛـﯾﺎج‬ ‫ ﺑـﺎﻹﺿـﺎﻓـﺔ ﻟـﻠﻣراﯾـﺔ اﻟـﻠﻲ ﺑـﺗﯾﺟﻲ‬،‫ﻣـراﯾـﺔ ﺳـواء ﻛـﺎﻧـت ﻋـﻠﺑﺔ ﺑـودرة أو آي ﺷـﺎدو أو أﺣـﻣر ﺧـدود‬ ‫ ﻷن ﻏـﺎﻟـﺑﺎ ﺑـﺗﺑﻘﻰ‬،‫ رﻏـم إن اﻟـﺑﻧﺎت ﻧـﺎدرا ﻣـﺎ ﺑـﯾﺑﺻوا ﻓـﻲ ھـذه اﻟـﻣراﯾـﺎت‬،‫ﻣـﺗﻌﻠﻘﺔ ﻓـﻲ ﺷـﻧطﺔ اﻟـﻣﺎﻛـﯾﺎج‬ ‫ ﺳـﻧﺔ وﻣﻛﺳـرّ ة وﺣـﺎﻟـﺗﮭﺎ‬١٠٠ ‫ ﺻـﺣﯾﺢ ﺑـﺗﺑﻘﻰ ﻗـدﯾـﻣﺔ وﺑـﻘﻰ ﻟـﮭﺎ‬،‫ﻣـﻌﺎھـم ﻣـراﯾـﺔ أﺻـﻼ ﻓـﻲ اﻟـﺷﻧطﺔ‬ !‫ ﻟـﻛﻧﮭم أﺑدا ﻻ ﯾﺗﺧﻠﯾن ﻋﻧﮭﺎ وﺗظل ﻓﻲ ﺷﻧطﺔ إﯾدھم ﻟﺣد ﻣﺎ ﭠﺗدﻏدغ ﺗﻣﺎﻣﺎ‬،‫ﺑﺎﻟﺑﻼ‬ Ammā al-mirāyah fa-hiya al-muntag al-akthar ihdāran fī ‘ālam al-makyāj, li-anna ma‘ kull ‘ulbat makyāj bitibqá fīh mirāyah sawā’ kānat ‘ulbat būdrah aw āy shādū aw aḥmar khudūd, bi-iliḍāfah lil-mirāyah illī bitīgī mit‘allaqah fī shanṭit al-makyāj, raghm anna al-banāt nādiran mā bīybussū fī hādhihi al-mirāyah, li-anna ghāliban bitibqá ma‘āhum mirāyah aṣlan fī al-shanṭah, saḥīḥ bitibqá qadīmah wa-baqiya la-hā 100 sanah wa-mukassarah wahālatuhā bi-al-balā, lākinahum abadan lā yatakhallīn ‘anhā wataẓall fī shanṭit īdhum la-ḥadd mā titdaghdagh tamāman! Translation: As for the mirror, it is the most wasted product in the world of make up, because with every pack of make up - 160 ! there is a mirror whether powder, eye shadow or blusher, in addition to the mirror that comes hanging in a make up bag, despite girls rarely looking in [using] this mirror, because usually they have a mirror in their bag in the first place. It’s true that the mirror would be an old one, in the bag for 100 years, broken and in a sorry state, but never would they give it up and it remains in their handbags until it is completely crushed! One firstly notices that not all ‘āmmīyah words are highlighted, for example ‫( ﻣـراﯾـﺔ‬mirāyah, ‘mirror’) and ‫( ﺷـﻧطﺔ‬shanṭah, ‘bag’) whose fuṣḥá equivalents would be ‫( ﻣــــرآة‬mir’āh, ‘mirror’) and ‫( ﺣــــﻘـﯾـﺑـﺔ‬ḥaqībah, ‘bag’) respectively. Secondly, we see the use of borrowed (foreign) words, such as ‫ﻣــــﺎﻛــــﯾـﺎج‬ (makyāj , ‘make up’) from the French ‘maquillage' and ‫( آي ﺷــــﺎدو‬āy shādū, ‘eye shadow’) from the English ‘eye shadow’ which is a feature of ESA (Badawi, 1973) and IA as outlined above. Thirdly, the structure of the language and content can be seen to follow the same pattern identified above: the passage begins with a fuṣḥá part (excluding the use of the ‘āmmīyah form ‫ﻣــــراﯾــــﺔ‬, as it is used consistently within the passage and would probably cause more confusion if it were used alongside its fuṣḥá equivalent). This is marked by a comma at the end (since the whole passage is technically one sentence, we will use the commas as internal dividers), followed by a switch after the initial comma to ‘āmmīyah, before a switch after the last comma to fuṣḥá and a switch back to ‘āmmīyah in that same final part of the text. The reasons for the switches again mirror the content; the first part is presented as statement or fact: that the mirror is the most wasted of all the beauty products. It is followed by the writer’s rationale for this statement, in ‘āmmīyah, although it is not identified by Håland as such. I view the text between the first and last comma as ‘āmmīyah, simply because it can all be read as such without any switches to fuṣḥá, although it contains some insertions of fuṣḥá words as is typical of ESA, such as ‫( ﺑـﺎﻹﺿـﺎﻓـﺔ‬which is not marked as fuṣḥá by Håland) and ‫ھـذه‬, which as seen above, appears to be a common feature of this style of writing, and matches Mejdell's (2011-2) finding of a preference for using fuṣḥá demonstratives in mixed speech. The final part, after the last comma, sees a return to fuṣḥá as another claim is made (that they would - 161 ! never give it up), followed by more ‘āmmīyah, to highlight the humour of the comment (until it is completely crushed!). Using the same bold font for fuṣḥá and underlining for ‘āmmīyah, I would categorise the text as follows: ‫ ﻷن ﻣـﻊ ﻛـل ﻋـﻠﺑﺔ ﻣـﺎﻛـﯾﺎج ﺑـﺗﺑﻘﻰ ﻓـﯾﮫ‬،‫اﻣـﺎ اﻟـﻣراﯾـﺔ ﻓﮭـﻲ اﻟـﻣﻧﺗﺞ اﻷﻛـﺛر إھـدارا ﻓـﻲ ﻋـﺎﻟـم اﻟـﻣﺎﻛـﯾﺎج‬ ‫ ﺑـﺎﻹﺿـﺎﻓـﺔ ﻟـﻠﻣراﯾـﺔ اﻟـﻠﻲ ﺑـﺗﯾﺟﻲ‬،‫ﻣـراﯾـﺔ ﺳـواء ﻛـﺎﻧـت ﻋـﻠﺑﺔ ﺑـودرة أو آي ﺷـﺎدو أو أﺣـﻣر ﺧـدود‬ ‫ ﻷن ﻏـﺎﻟـﺑﺎ ﺑـﺗﺑﻘﻰ‬،‫ رﻏـم إن اﻟـﺑﻧﺎت ﻧـﺎدرا ﻣـﺎ ﺑـﯾﺑﺻوا ﻓـﻲ ھـذه اﻟـﻣراﯾـﺎت‬،‫ﻣـﺗﻌﻠﻘﺔ ﻓـﻲ ﺷـﻧطﺔ اﻟـﻣﺎﻛـﯾﺎج‬ ‫ ﺳـﻧﺔ وﻣﻛﺳـرّ ة وﺣـﺎﻟـﺗﮭﺎ‬١٠٠ ‫ ﺻـﺣﯾﺢ ﺑـﺗﺑﻘﻰ ﻗـدﯾـﻣﺔ وﺑـﻘﻰ ﻟـﮭﺎ‬،‫ﻣـﻌﺎھـم ﻣـراﯾـﺔ أﺻـﻼ ﻓـﻲ اﻟـﺷﻧطﺔ‬ !‫ ﻟـﻛﻧﮭم أﺑدا ﻻ ﯾﺗﺧﻠﯾن ﻋﻧﮭﺎ وﺗظل ﻓﻲ ﺷﻧطﺔ إﯾدھم ﻟﺣد ﻣﺎ ﭠﺗدﻏدغ ﺗﻣﺎﻣﺎ‬،‫ﺑﺎﻟﺑﻼ‬ Ammā al-mirāyah fa-hiya al-muntag al-akthar ihdāran fī ‘ālam al-makyāj, li-anna ma‘ kull ‘ulbat makyāj bitibqá fīh mirāyah sawā’ kānat ‘ulbat būdrah aw āy shādū aw aḥmar khudūd, bi-iliḍāfah lil-mirāyah illī bitīgī mit’allaqah fī shanṭit al-makyāj, raghm anna al-banāt nādiran mā bīybussū fī hādhihi al-mirāyah, li-anna ghāliban bitibqá ma‘āhum mirāyah aṣlan fī al-shanṭah, saḥīḥ bitibqá qadīmah wa-baqiya la-hā 100 sanah wa-mukassarah wahālatuhā bi-al-balā, lākinahum abadan lā yatakhalin ‘anhā wataẓall fī shanṭit īdhum la-ḥadd mā titdaghdagh tamāman! Translation: As for the mirror, it is the most wasted product in the world of make up, because with every pack of make up there is a mirror whether powder, eye shadow or blusher, in addition to the mirror that comes hanging in a make up bag, despite girls rarely looking in [using] this mirror, because usually they have a mirror in their bag in the first place. It’s true that the mirror would be an old one, in the bag for 100 years, broken and in a sorry state, but never would they give it up and it remains in their handbags until it is completely crushed! This is a small example but it is consistent with the overall findings of this study. Like the example in Rosenbaum (2000), this one is taken from a satirical publication in which the use of humour is prevalent and the target readership are less-educated than those of typical high-brow publications, and the subject is a light-hearted rather than a serious one. - 162 ! - 6.4 Conclusions The findings of the three studies examined above are consistent with the findings of this study, and the writing styles proposed in the theoretical framework above can be applied across the examples seen in these studies. In the first study, the writing styles of prominent online youth political bloggers was found to be consistent with the writing styles of the 6th April Youth movement page, including MSA, IA and CWA, and the use of strategic code-switching. Their use of code-switching and CWA was not found to be a result of lack of command of MSA, as evidenced by their use of MSA as required. Rather, it is a stylistic device to achieve their linguistic aims. In the second study, a more detailed examination of instances of code-switching between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah showed that they are not random and follow closely the inter-sentential, mostly monodirectional patterns revealed in this study. The importance of context was highlighted as necessary to analyse the style of the text as a whole, given the majority of shared items between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah. In the third study, the examples described as fuṣḥá̄ mmīyah were consistent with the description of the LIA style identified in tis study. Not all examples from all three studies were analysed and compared at the same level of detail, and as further studies and examples emerge, it would be interesting to compare these again with the proposed theoretical framework, which will undoubtedly evolve as new forms of writing come to light. - 163 ! - Chapter 7 Conclusions 7.1 Overview of the study This aim of this study has been the proposal of a new theoretical framework for written Arabic to include fuṣḥá, ‘āmmīyah and mixed forms, both in print and online. Badawi’s (1973) identification of five Arabic language levels made a distinction between the written and spoken forms of Arabic, with mixing assumed to occur in speaking only. Badawi’s third level, ESA, has been the subject of many studies since it presents the most linguistically mixed and therefore diverse and interesting language level. However, in light of the evidence of mixed Arabic writing presented in this study, the new proposed theoretical framework presents a number of Arabic writing ‘styles’ that take into account the fluid nature of mixing in many genres of writing, as well as its most common patterns, features and underlying motivations. Additionally, this study gives an outline of the distinctive features of Egyptian ‘āmmīyah as compared to fuṣḥá and delineates the degrees of variation between them as a practical tool for comparison with numerous illustrative examples, all presented in Chapter 4. The proposed framework has been applied to the case study of the 6th April Youth Movement Facebook Page, as well as to examples from other studies of mixed writing in print literature and on other online platforms such as Twitter and the personal blogs of influential youth political activists. The findings of the study regarding language use and mixing styles, patterns and motivations have been found to be consistent across the various media and time periods, from the age of the nahḍah at the turn of the nineteenth century and into the early twentieth century, to the mid-twentieth century in the literary cannon of modern Arabic literature that arose and established itself at the time, through to the rise of social media and the online youth political activism that led to the popular protests of 2011, which have in turn played a role in the proliferation of online writing in Arabic our lives today. - 164 ! - 7.2 Arabic as a unified language Contrary to popular belief that fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah forms of Arabic exist in conflict with each other, each threatening to depose the other, this study has shown how both forms coexist in a harmonious and symbiotic relationship as equal parts of one, unified language. The mere fact of their existence shows a language that is rich in forms and layers of meanings, each used to maximum rhetorical effect by its users, in speaking and writing alike. This view of the language echoes the translanguaging view of bilingual speakers, who continuously navigate their single linguistic repertoire for the appropriate forms (Garcia & Wei, 2014). Earlier descriptions of the Arabic language as diglossic or even multiglossic, with High and Low levels for the educated and uneducated respectively (Ferguson, 1959); Badawi, 1973), are replaced with descriptions of styles, techniques and strategies that seamlessly mix and blend forms as appropriate to the message being conveyed. Descriptions of random mixing and code-switching have been found to be inaccurate, with example after example showing consistent patterns and motivations for both (Eid, 1988; Bassiouney, 2006). The question of literacy becomes moot in discussions of writing, but is replaced by questions around education level and mastery of the language as seemingly plausible reasons for using spoken forms in writing. Again this study has demonstrated that mastery of and ability to write in fuṣḥá does not conflict with mastery of and ability to write in ‘āmmīyah. Rather the command of both leads to a sophisticated form of mixing, that is carried out in a deliberate and effective way that is appropriate to the audience and message being conveyed. 7.3 The role of political activism in ‘āmmīyah writing The similarities observed between the political climates in Egypt of the nahḍah, formation of the republic and unrest of 2011, coincide with the surges in ‘āmmīyah writing: the early nationalist newspapers, the rise of modern Arabic drama and literature, and the age of online writing, and appear to have served as impetuses for the use of ‘āmmīyah in writing. - 165 ! Similarities have also been drawn between the political activism of the early nationalist writers and the present-day online activists, as well as between the modern literary writers employing innovative new forms of IA in their writing. In the case of the activists, parallels were drawn between their desire to reach as wide an audience as possible and their use of ‘āmmīyah in writing, whereas the strategies and techniques used in IA were shown to be used across the literary works. The fear that ‘āmmīyah taking over as a lingua franca in cross-dialectal communication will lead to mutual unintelligibility between speakers has been shown to be inaccurate, since speakers have been observed to use a variety of strategies to communicate in cross-dialectal settings, resulting in a high intelligibility between different dialects (Abu-Melhim, 1992; Soliman, 2014). The same fear is applied when ‘āmmīyah is observed in writing (Saīd, 1964). However, if the differences between the various forms of the language are viewed in a structured way, this could aid intelligibility between the dialects in writing, in much the same way as it does in speaking, with the writer adapting their writing style to suit their intended audience in much the same way speakers do whilst speaking. In fact, if CWA is to become more and more widespread, it is conceivable that inter-dialectal writing would become more mutually intelligible as we have seen with ESA. It would be an interesting point for further research to compare writing strategies between different dialects, but this has been outside the scope of this study. 7.4 Social media and the Arab Spring as catalysts for language change Although this study has shown that writing in ‘āmmīyah and mixing between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah in writing is not new, the proliferation of online writing in Arabic has made it an everyday form of writing for many Arabic speakers. The democratisation of the online writing process, free of editorial constraints, means that people are free to write not only whatever content they choose, but they are also free to use whatever form of language they choose. Whereas previously publication was under stringent control and censorship, there is much greater freedom for writers - 166 ! to publish their work online, leading to a surge in colloquial as well as mixed writing - a democratisation of the language that will undoubtedly continue to develop and evolve with time and as new generations of users develop their own styles for writing in Arabic. 7.5 The proposed theoretical framework The proposed theoretical framework in Part I of this study has been presented as a view of the language as one, unified language, with a distinct set of differences, from phonological to lexical and grammatical (including morphological and syntactic). These differences have been outlined in detail, with illustrative examples for each documenting the exact forms in both fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah. The proposed framework presents a number of writing styles used by writers, including: Classical Arabic (CA), Middle Arabic (MA), Modern Standard Arabic (MSA), Intermediate Arabic (IA), Lower Intermediate Arabic (LIA), Colloquial Written Arabic (CWA) and Chat-Speak (ChS). These styles may be employed by a writer exclusively in a text, or a mix of styles may be used. Additionally, writers employ various techniques and strategies such as code-switching, seamless blending and strategic bivalency, within each style. For example, a writer using MSA may employ code-switches to ‘āmmīyah or a foreign borrowing; a writer using IA may employ codeswitching between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah, or use strategic bivalency to seamlessly blend the two; and a writer using CWA may borrow from MSA certain well-known forms or expressions. This use of the language sees the writers as using all the tools at their disposal in order to convey an authentic message to their audiences, delicately balancing tradition and modernity, expectation and innovation. Rather than viewing this constant adaptation and evolution of the language as a threat to its existence, it is seen as the very reason it has survived and flourished. The proposed framework, when applied to case studies and examples, has shown consistently that the writing styles outlined in it are applied by writers across different genres and media. In cases of code-switching and mixing, the motivations for these remain largely the same across the various styles and genres, with humorous and emotive content lending - 167 ! itself largely but not exclusively to CWA, and more factual and informative content lending itself largely but not exclusively to MSA. MA does not seem to appear in modern texts, and reveals a category of features that distinguishes it from modern mixed writing; features that are neither fuṣḥá nor ‘āmmīyah. On the contrary, mixing in modern texts is found to contain elements from both fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah, and many shared elements between them, but do not seem to contain elements that are neither fuṣḥá nor ‘āmmīyah. IA developed as a largely literary style in modern Arabic literature in the mid-twentieth century at the hands of such prominent writers as Tawfiq al-Hakim, Yusuf Sibai and Yusuf Idris. An innovative approach at the time, it must be viewed in the context of the perceived ‘struggle’ between the dominance of fuṣḥá in the literary establishment and the everyday spoken form of ‘āmmīyah that the writers sought to use in their writing to reflect the realism of their novels and plays. The result of this struggle was a form that is neither wholly fuṣḥá nor wholly ‘āmmīyah, but instead uses elements of both as the writer sees fit. Ideology undoubtedly influenced the way in which IA was used by each writer, with each seeking to reconcile between the two forms in a way that satisfied all parties: the writer, the establishment and the reader. The various techniques used by each writer vary and were discussed in detail, but three salient techniques of IA emerged: code-switching between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah, with or without a ’transition’ between the two, such as a typographical marker or punctuation of some kind, or a transitional sentence or phrase, that usually can be read as either fuṣḥá or ‘āmmīyah, or is written in one with a borrowing from the other; borrowing from fuṣḥá, ‘āmmīyah or a foreign language such as English or French, which can be typographically marked with the use of quotation marks or brackets, or seamlessly blended into the text; and strategic bivalency, to use Mejdell’s (2014) term, which uses shared lexical items to create text that can be read equally as fuṣḥá or ‘āmmīyah, a technique used by prominent writers such as Ibrahim Eissa (ibid.) and Yusuf Sibai (Abdel Malek, 1972). The development of IA in relation to MSA can be seen as similar to the development of MSA in relation to CA - both are a form of adjustment of the language, relying on some form of borrowing (whether - 168 ! from ‘āmmīyah or a foreign language). In IA borrowing is found to be more from ‘āmmīyah (lexicon, structures and idioms) and in MSA borrowing is seen to be more from foreign languages (particularly for technical/ scientific terms). Both IA and MSA share the aim of simplifying the language and adjusting it to suit the needs of the time. MSA has continued to evolve (Parkinson, 2010), borrowing more and more terms from foreign languages, meaning it is not static and has survived precisely because of this continuous evolution. LIA has been identified as a lowbrow version of IA, used by writers to achieve a humorous effect whether to soften a serious subject, or to suit the nature of more light-hearted content aimed at a less-educated readership. While Rosenbaum views the switching between and mixing of fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah as random and even interchangeable, a reexamination in this study of one of his examples shows the switching and mixing found in LIA to be structured, with clear motivations and rhetorical effect. The application of the proposed framework in Part II to the case study of the 6th April Youth Movement Facebook page in Chapter 5 showed consistent use of MSA, IA and CWA, with distinct categories for the content of each. These categories were identified as: formal posts, announcements, knowledge and learning, invitations/opinion polls/surveys/questions, and photo and video captions - these categories being written in mostly MSA; cartoons/jokes, appeals, ideas/thoughts/feelings, photo and video commentaries (as opposed to captions), opinion polls/surveys, and slogans - written in CWA or at times IA. The language used for earlier posts containing opinion polls and surveys was found to be MSA, while later posts were found to contain a mix of MSA and CWA/IA. As would be expected, humorous and emotive content was found to be written mostly in CWA and to a lesser degree IA, while more formal or factual content was found to be written in MSA. It is interesting to note that within each style code-switching and borrowing was found, showing a high level of familiarity and comfort with the various styles of Arabic writing. These styles were also identified in a reexamination of examples in three studies of mixed writing in Chapter 6: online in blogs (Ramsay, 2012) and on Twitter (Kosoff, 2014); and in print (Håland, 2017). The examples - 169 ! examined were found to use the same strategies and have the same motivations for language use, further supporting the overall findings of this study regarding language use online and the writing styles used by online youth activists, their code-switching patterns and motivations, which further supports the proposed theoretical framework of this study. 7.6 Limitations of the study and areas for further research This study was limited to examples of Egyptian ‘āmmīyah and the proposed theoretical framework is based on these. It could in future be applied to other Arabic dialects with useful comparisons made between the various dialects. At the time this study began, technological restrictions on online data gathering and analysis, particularly for Arabic language content, limited the number and frequency of posts that could be collected and monitored in this study. These have since improved and could potentially offer more scope for automated processes for data gathering, storing and analysis. Several areas have been identified as further areas of study, including: the different types of continua with potential clustering around particular points as an expansion on the application of the continuum theory (Rickford, 1987) to Arabic by Hary (1996); the use of Arabic on the internet by exploring its use in various online domains, such as the language of email, the language of chatrooms, etc, as per Crystal (2006); the visual aspects of multilingual texts, such as posters, advertisements, etc, as per Sebba (2012); further examples of mixed literary writers, such as Farah Anton, his language use and works; al-Hakim’s own application of the third language in his works, since no known systematic study of alHakim’s third language has been undertaken (Badawi, 1973), as well as al-Hakim’s vision for a unified language and to what extent it has been realised in the Arabic language situation today, since it can be argued that the gap between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah as two distinct varieties is indeed diminishing; the use of IA by non-literary writers, which has been identified to some degree in online writing in this study; a comparison between the differences found between fuṣḥá and Egyptian ‘āmmīyah and those between fuṣḥá and other ‘āmmīyāt as per the structure outlined in this - 170 ! study, as well as an application of the proposed theoretical framework to texts in different dialects. 7.7 Impact In a rapidly changing world, language study and the field of Arabic sociolinguistics in particular is fast evolving. Since Ferguson’s (1959) landmark study, the field of Arabic sociolinguistics has been preoccupied by the concept of diglossia and the complex, multi-faceted nature of Arabic language use. With the arrival of Badawi’s (1973) study, attention turned to the description and analysis of ESA and the way in which Arabic speakers mix fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah in their speech. Since the rise of the internet and the emergence of the field of internet linguistics, it has become clear that the internet as a medium for communication has become a serious object of study, alongside traditional written and spoken media, particularly since the political events of 2011 and the widespread role that social media played and continues to play in our daily lives. This study has pulled together established theoretical frameworks for the study of Arabic, while looking at new developments in Arabic writing both online and in print, and proposed a new theoretical framework for Arabic writing based on empirical evidence and presenting within it an exploration of the differences between fuṣḥá and ‘āmmīyah, as well as the degree to which they differ on various levels. This framework has the potential to change the field of Arabic sociolinguistics and the way that Arabic is viewed and analysed by users and researchers alike. The framework has been applied to numerous examples of online and print writing and found to be consistent with these. The findings of this study have been compared to the findings of other studies in the field and found not only to be consistent with the other findings, but also to provide a more holistic and deeper analytical approach to the study of Arabic writing, impacting future research in the field by providing a guide for conducting analysis and a framework against which to place it. - 171 ! - 7.8 Implications The implications of this study can be extended beyond the field of Arabic sociolinguistics, which it has the potential to change radically, to the field of teaching Arabic as a foreign language, which in recent years has moved towards embracing teaching the spoken form of the language, ’āmmīyah, alongside the Standard written form, fuṣḥá. Learners interested in using Arabic social media will need the language skills to navigate these, understanding not only how to speak in ’āmmīyah and read and write in fuṣḥá, but also the way in which the two are used, both separately and when mixed in social media and print literature. In short, this study has provided a framework for analysing mixed Arabic writing both online and in print, as well as detailed the differences between fuṣḥá and ’āmmīyah forms of Arabic, showing how and where the lines between these can be blurred and the shared forms between them used for maximum effect. The framework has the potential to change the field of Arabic sociolinguistics as well as major implications for the field of teaching Arabic as a foreign language. In the absence of an established field of Arabic internet linguistics, this study has taken a first step towards providing a framework that can be used, developed and adapted to various forms of online writing. The impact and implications of this study can continue to evolve and inform future generations of Arabic researchers, students and teachers alike. - 172 ! - Bibliography Abboud & Marcus. 1975. Elementary Modern Standard Arabic. Michigan University Press. Abboud-Haggar, S. 2014. Egyptian Tales in Shayh al-Tantawi’s Handwritten notebook: Hikayat al-Shayh al-Tantawi: Partial edition with an introductory linguistic study. In: Durand, O., Langone, A. D. and Mion, G. (eds). Alf Lahga Wa Lahga: Proceedings of the 9th Aida Conference. Münster: Lit Verlag, pp. 11–21. Abdel-Jawad. 1981. Lexical and Phonological Variation in Spoken Arabic in Amman. Ph.D. thesis, University of Pennsylvania. Abdel-Malek, Z. N. 1972. The Influence of Diglossia on the Novels of Yuusif al-Sibaaʿi. Journal of Arabic Literature [online] 3. Brill, pp.132-141. [Accessed 27 October 2017]. Available from: www.jstor.org/stable/ 4182901. Abdulkafi, A. 2016. Modern Arabic sociolinguistics: diglossia, code-switching, attitudes and identity. New York: Routledge. Aboelezz, M. 2009. Latinised Arabic and Connections to Bilingual Ability. Papers from the Lancaster University Postgraduate Conference in Linguistics and Language Teaching (LAEL PG) [online]. 3 [Accessed 20 June 2011]. Available from: http://www.ling.lancs.ac.uk/pgconference/ v03.htm. Abou-Seida, A. M. 1975. Diglossia in Egyptian Arabic: prolegomena to a pan-Arabic socio-linguistic study. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms Abu-Haidar, J. 2013. Hispano-Arabic Literature and the Early Provencal Lyrics. Oxon, Routledge Abu-Melhim, Abdel-Rahman Husni. 1992. Communication across Arabic Dialects: Code-Switching and Linguistic Accommodation in Informal Conversational Interactions. Ph.D. thesis, Texas A&M University. Al-Husari, Abu Khaldun Sati. 1985. Qadiyat al-Fus-ha wa-al’Amiyyah [an extract from Fi al-Adab wa-al-Lughah wa-Ilaqat-huma bil-Qawmiyah]. In Brustad, K., Al-Batal, M., Al-Tonsi, A. Al-Kitaab fii ta’allum al-Arabiyya: A textbook for Arabic. Washington D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 1995. pp. 282-283. - 173 ! Al-Wer, Enam. 1997. Arabic between reality and ideology. International Journal of Applied Linguistics. 7(2), 251 - 265. United Kingdom. Al-Wer, Enam & Jong, Rudolf Erik de. 2009. Arabic dialectology : In honour of Clive Holes on the occasion of his sixtieth birthday Studies in Semitic languages and linguistics. 53. Leiden: Brill. Albirini, A. 2011. The sociolinguistic functions of codeswitching between Standard Arabic and Dialectal Arabic. Language in Society [online], 40(5), 537-562. [Accessed 03 February 2018]. Available from: https://doi.org/ 10.1017/S0047404511000674 Amin, H. 2001. Mass Media in the Arab States between Diversification and Stagnation: An Overview. In: Kai H. ed. Mass media, politics, and society in the Middle East. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton. Auer, P. 1998. Introduction: Bilingual conversation revisited. In: Auer, P. ed. Code-switching in conversation: Language, Interaction and Identity. London: Routledge, 1-24. Auer, p. 1999. From code-switching via language mixing to fused lects: Toward a dynamic typology of bilingual speech. The International Journal of Bilingualism. 3/4, 309-332. Ayish, M. I. 2001. The Changing Face of Arab Communications: Media Survival in the Information Age. In Mass media, politics, and society in the Middle East. Kai H., Cresskill. N.J.: Hampton. Badawi, El-Said. 2006. Foreword, Arabic for Non-native Speakers in the 21st Century: A Shopping List. In: Wahba, K. M., Taha, Z. A., and England, L. eds. Handbook for Arabic Language Teaching Professionals in the 21st Century. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. (pp. ix-xiv) Badawi, El-Said. 1973. Mustawayat al-arabiyya l-mu’assira fi misr. Cairo: dar al-ma’arif. Badawi, M. M. 1987. Modern Arabic Drama in Egypt. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 8-74. Bahry, L.Y. 2001. The New Arab Media Phenomenon: Qatar’s Al-Jazeera. Middle East Policy, 8(2). - 174 ! Bassiouney, R. 2006. Functions of code-switching in Egypt: Evidence from Monologues (Studies in Semitic languages and linguistics; 46). Leiden: Brill. Bassiouney, R. 2013. Arabic Sociolinguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Beinin, J. 1994. Writing Class: Workers and Modern Egyptian Colloquial Poetry (Zajal). Poetics Today, 15(2), 191-215. Bellem, A., and Smith, R. 2014. 'Middle Arabic'? : morpho-syntactic features of clashing grammars in a thirteenth-century Arabian text. In Elmaz, O., and Watson, J. C. E. Languages of Southern Arabia: Papers from the Special Session of the Seminar for Arabian Studies held on 27 July 2013 (Proceedings of the Seminar for Arabian Studies; 44). Belnap, R. Kirk. 2006. A Profile of Students of Arabic in U.S. Universities. In: Wahba, K. M., Taha, Z. A., and England, L. eds. Handbook for Arabic Language Teaching Professionals in the 21st Century. (pp. ix-xiv) Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers Bianchi, R. 2006. Revolution or Fad? Latinised Arabic Vernacular. In Davidson, P., Al Hamly, M., Aydelott, J., Coombe, C., & Troudi, S. (eds.) Proceedings of the 11th TESOL Arabia Conference: Teaching, Learning, Leading, 10. Dubai: TESOL Arabia, 329-344. Boyd, D. A. 2001. Saudi Arabia’s International Media Strategy: Influence through Multinational Ownership. In Mass Media, Politics, and Society in the Middle East. Kai H., Cresskill. N.J.: Hampton. Boyd, Douglas A. 1993. Broadcasting in the Arab World: A Survey of the Electronic Media in the Middle East. Ames: Iowa State University Press. British Council. Communicative Approach [online]. [Accessed 14 October 2011]. Available from www.teachingenglish.org.uk/think/knowledge-wiki/ communicative-approach. Brustad, K., Al-Batal, M., Al-Tonsi, A. 1995. Al-Kitaab fii ta’allum al-Arabiyya: A textbook for Arabic. Washington D.C.: Georgetown University Press. Brustad, K., Al-Batal, M., Al-Tonsi, A. 2004. Al-Kitaab fii ta’allum al-Arabiyya: A textbook for Arabic. 2nd ed. Washington D.C.: Georgetown University Press. - 175 ! Brustad, K. 2017. Diglossia as Ideology. In: Hoigilt, J., Mejdell, G. eds. The politics of written language in the Arab world: writing change. Studies in semitic languages and linguistics; 90. Leiden; Boston: Brill, pp. 41-67. Byram, M. [et al.]. 1992. The future of Arabic studies in Britain: problems and prospects for student recruitment in higher education. Durham: School of Education, University of Durham. Canale, Michael, and Swain, Merrill. 1980. Theoretical Bases of Communicative Approaches to Second Language Teaching and Testing. Applied Linguistics, 1, 1. Chejne, A.G. 1969. The Arabic Language and its Role in History. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Choueiri, Y. M. 2000. Arab Nationalism: A History. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. Crystal, D. 2011. Internet linguistics: a student guide. London : Routledge. Crystal, D. 2006. Language and the internet. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Crystal, D. 2003. The Cambridge encyclopedia of the English language, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Dawisha, A. 2003. Arab Nationalism in the Twentieth Century. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Dickins, J. 2002. Thinking Arabic Translation: Supplement. pp. 84-89. Manchester: University of Salford. Dickins, J. and Watson, J. 2006. Arabic Teaching in Britain and Ireland. In: Wahba, K. M., Taha, Z. A., and England, L. eds. Handbook for Arabic Language Teaching Professionals in the 21st Century. (pp. 107-114) Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers Doss, M. and Davies, H. 2013. al-‘Āmmīyah al-Miṣrīyah al-Maktūbah: Mukhtārāt min 1401 ilá 2009. al-Qāhirah: al-Hay’ah al-Miṣrīyah al-‘Āmmah lil-Kutub. Eastlake, J. 2007. Approaches to Language Teaching: A Historical Perspective. London: School of Oriental and African Studies Language Centre. - 176 ! Eid, M. (1988). Principles for code-switching between Standard and Egyptian Arabic. In Al-'Arabiyya, 21(1/2), 51-79 [online]. [Accessed 25 January 2018]. Available from www.jstor.org/stable/43194090 Elgibali, A. 1985. Towards a Sociolinguistic Analysis of Language Variation in Arabic: Cairene and Kuwaiti Dialects. PhD thesis, University of Pittsburgh. El-Hassan, S. A. 1978. Variation in the Demonstrative System on Educated Spoken Arabic. Archivum Linguisticum, 9(1), 32-57. El-Hassan, S. A. 1977. Educated Spoken Arabic in Egypt and the Levant: A Critical Review of Diglossia and Related Concepts. Archivum Linguisticum, 8(2), 112-132. Ellis, G. 1966. How culturally appropriate is the communicative approach? ELT J, 50(3), 213-218. Etling , B. [et al.]. 2009. Mapping the Arabic Blogosphere: Politics, Culture, and Dissent. Berkman Center Research Publication. 2009(06). Featherstone, J. 2010. Training Teachers of Arabic in the Communicative Approach [conference paper abstract]. Languages for the 21st Century: training, impact, influence [conference]. Sheffield: University of Sheffield. Ferguson, C. 1959. Diglossia. Word, 15, 325-340. New York: Linguistic Circle of New York. Ferguson, C. 1959b. The Arabic Koine. Language [Online]. 35(4: OctoberDecember). [Accessed 14 October 2011]. pp. 616-630. Available from: www.jstor.org/stable/410601 Freeman, A. 1996. Andrew Freeman’s Perspectives on Arabic Diglossia 1996. 9 December. Andy Freeman's Homepage [online]. [Accessed 14 October 2011]. Available from: innerbrat.org/Andyf/Articles/Diglossia/ digl_96.htm. Garcia, O. and Wei, L. 2014. Translanguaging: Language, bilingualism and education [online]. Basingstoke: Palgrave Pivot. Gershoni, I., Jankowski, J.P. 1986. Egypt, Islam and the Arabs: The Search for Egyptian Nationhood, 1900-1930. New York; Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ghonim, W. 2012. Revolution 2.0. London: Fourth Estate. - 177 ! Guaqybess T. 2001. Restructuring Television in Egypt: The Position of the State between Regional Supply and Local Demand. In: Mass media, politics, and society in the Middle East. Kai H., Cresskill. N.J.: Hampton. Gumperz, J. 1982. Discourse Strategies. [Online]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [Accessed 10 January 2018]. Available from: https:// doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511611834 Haeri, N. 2003. Sacred Language, Ordinary People: Dilemmas of Culture and Politics in Egypt. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Haeri, N. 1997. The Sociolinguistic Market of Cairo: Gender, Class and Education. London: Kegan Paul International. Haeri, N. 1996. Conceptualizing Heterogeneity in Arabic. Égypte/Monde arabe [online]. Première série(27-28). [Accessed 14 October 2011]. Available from: http://ema.revues.org/index1947.html Hafez, Kai [ed.]. 2001. Mass media, politics, and society in the Middle East. Cresskill, N.J. ; [Great Britain] : Hampton. Ḥakīm, T. (1956). Al-Ṣafqah / Tawfīq al-Ḥakīm. [Cairo]: Maktabat al-Ādāb wa-Maṭbaʻatuhā. Ḥakīm, T. (1966). Al-Warṭah / Tawfīq al-Ḥakīm. [Al-Qāhirah]: Maktabat alĀdāb wa-Maṭbaʻatuhā. Håland, E. M. 2017. Adab sākhir (Satirical Literature) and the use of Egyptian vernacular. Hoigilt, J., Mejdell, G. (eds.) The Politics of Written Language in the Arab World: Writing Change. Leiden; Boston: Brill, 142-165. Hanssen, J. and Weiss, M. (eds). 2017. Arabic Thought beyond the Liberal Age: Towards an Intellectual History of the Nahda. [Online]. Online ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [Accessed 10 January 2017]. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316479827 Harvey, D. 1979. Spoken Arabic. London: Hodder and Stoughton. Hary, B. 1996. The language continuum in Arabic multiglossia. In Elgibali, A. (ed.) Understanding Arabic: Essays in contemporary Arabic linguistics in honor of El-Said Badawi. Cairo: The American University in Cairo Press. Hjelmslev, Louis. 1953 [1943]. Prolegomena to a Theory of Language. Baltimore: Indiana University Publications in Anthropology and Linguistics - 178 ! (IJAL Memoir, 7). 2nd OD (slightly rev.): Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1961. Dt.: Hjelmslev 1974. Holes, C. 1995. Modern Arabic: Structures and Functions. London: Longman. Høigilt, J., Mejdell, G. eds. 2017. The Politics of Written Language in the Arab World: Writing Change. Studies in Semitic Languages and Linguistics. [Online]. 90. [Accessed 10 January 2018]. Available from: booksandjournals.brillonline.com/content/books/9789004346178 Hourani, A. 1962. Arabic Thought in the Liberal Age. London: Oxford University Press. Husseinali, G. 2006. Who is Studying Arabic and Why? A Survey of Arabic Students’ Orientations at a Major University. Foreign Language Annals, 39(3), 397-414. Ibrahim, R. 2009. What is unique in the brain of an Arabic speaker? Journal of Psychology Research and Behavior Management [online]. 2009(2), [Accessed 14 October 2001]. Available from: www.dovepress.com/thecognitive-basis-of-diglossia-in-arabic-evidence-from-a-repetition--peerreviewed-article-PRBM. Ibrahim, Z. 2010. Cases of written code-switching in Egyptian opposition newspapers. In: Bassiouney, R. ed. Arabic and the Media: Linguistic analyses and applications. Leiden: Brill, 23-45. Imbabi, F. 1994. Maraa’i al-Qatl. [The Killing Fields]. Giza: al-Nahr lil-Nashr wal-Tawzi’. James, L. (2006). Whose Voice? Nasser, the Arabs, and Sawt al-Arab Radio. Transnational Broadcasting Journal [online]. 16 [Accessed 19 January 2009]. Available from:http:// archived.tbsjournal.arabmediasociety.com/James.html. Jonsson, C. 2012. Making Silenced Voices Heard: Code-switching in multilingual literary text in Sweden. In: Sebba, M., Mahootian, S., & Jonsson, C. Language mixing and code-switching in writing : Approaches to mixed-language written discourse. Routledge critical studies in multilingualism; 2, pp. 271—296. Kaye, A. S. 2010. Mixed Styles in Spoken Arabic in Egypt: Somewhere between Order and Chaos, by Gunvor Mejdell. Journal of Near Eastern - 179 ! Studies [online], 69(2), 277-278. The University of Chicago Press. [Accessed 08 April 2015]. Available from: www.jstor.org/stable/ 10.1086/658978. Khamis, S., Vaughn, K. 2011. Cyberactivisim in the Egyptian Revolution: How Civic Engagement and Citizen Journalism Tilted the Balance. Arab Media & Society [online]. 13(Summer 2011), [Accessed 14 October 2011]. Available from: http://www.arabmediasociety.com/?article=769. Kosoff, Z. 2014. Code-Switching in Egyptian Arabic: A Sociolinguistic Analysis of Twitter. Al-‘Arabiyya. [Online]. 47. Georgetown University Press, pp. 83-99. [Accessed 02 January 2017]. Available from: www.jstor.org/stable/24635374 Kurpershoek, P. M. 1981. The short stories of Yūsuf Idrīs: a modern Egyptian author. Leiden: Brill. Lentin, J. Middle Arabic. In: Encyclopedia of Arabic Language and Linguistics. [Online]. Edzard, L., Jong, R. de., Baalbaki, R., Dickins, J., Eid, M., Larcher, P., Watson, J. C. E., et al. (eds.). [17.10.2017]. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/1570-6699_eall_EALL_COM_vol3_0213. Marçais, W. 1930. La diglossie arabe. L'Enseignement Public 97, 401- 409. Mazraani, N. 1997. Aspects of Language Variation in Arabic Political Speech Making. Richmond, Surrey: Curzon Press. Meiseles, G. 1980. Educated Spoken Arabic and the Arabic Language Continuum. Archivum Linguisticum 11(2), 118-43. Mejdell, G. 2014. Strategic Bivalency in Written ‘Mixed Style’? A Reading of Ibrahīm ʿĪsā in Al-Dustūr. In: Durand, O., Langone, A. D. and Mion, G. (eds). Alf Lahga Wa Lahga: Proceedings of the 9th Aida Conference. Münster: Lit Verlag, pp.273-278. Mejdell, G. 2011-12. Diglossia, Code-Switching, Style Variation and Congruence: Notions for Analysing Mixed Arabic. In: Al-‘Arabiyyah [online] 44-45, 29- 39. [Accessed 25 January 2018]. Available from: www.jstor.org/ stable/43208722. Mejdell, G. 2006. Mixed Styles in Spoken Arabic in Egypt: Somewhere between Order and Chaos. Leiden: Brill. Miller, C. 2007. Arabic in the city : Issues in dialect contact and language variation. Routledge Arabic linguistics series [online]. - 180 ! Mitchell T. F. 1990. Pronouncing Arabic I. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Mitchell T. F. 1986. What is educated spoken Arabic?. B. H. Jernudd & M, H. eds. International Journal of the Sociology of Language. 61(1986: Issues in Arabic Sociolinguistics), 7-32. Mitchell T. F. 1978. An Introduction to Egyptian Colloquial Arabic. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Mitchell T. F., El-Hassan. S. 1994. Modality, Mood and Aspect in Spoken Arabic: with special attention to Egypt and the Levant. London: Kegan Paul International. Omar, M. K. 2007. The Acquisition of Egyptian Arabic as a Native Language. Georgetown, Georgetown University Press. Palmer, J. 2007. Arabic Diglossia: Teaching Only the Standard Variety is a Disservice to Students. Arizona Working Papers in SLA & Teaching. 14, 111-122. Panovic, I. 2010. The Beginnings of Wikipedia Masry. Al-Logha: Series of Papers in Linguistics. 8, 93-127. Parkinson, D. B. 1993. Knowing Standard Arabic: Testing Egyptians’ MSA Abilities. In: Eid, M., Holes, C. eds. Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics V: Papers from the fifth annual symposium on Arabic linguistics. Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 47-73. Parkinson, D. B. 1985. Constructing the Social Context of Communication: Terms of Address in Egyptian Arabic: Contributions to the Sociology of Language. [Berlin]: Mouton De Gruyter. Parkinson, D. B. 2010. Communities Of Use In Arabic Newspaper Language: The Meaning Of The Country Effect. Arabic and the Media, pp. 47-60. Brill [online]. [Accessed 25 August 2018]. Available from: b o o k s a n d j o u r n a l s . b r i l l o n l i n e . c o m / c o n t e n t / b o o k s / 1 0 . 11 6 3 / e j . 9789004182585.i-303.28 Ramsay, G. 2012. What kind of Arabic and why? Language in Egyptian blogs. Orientalia Su’āmmīyahna. LXI Suppl., 49-87. Available from: https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:635257/FULLTEXT02.pdf Redden, E. 2008. Shifting Winds in Arabic Teaching. Inside Higher Ed [online]. [Accessed 7 October 2011]. Available from: http:// www.insidehighered.com/news/2008/10/01/arabic. - 181 ! Richards, J. C. 2006. Communicative Language Teaching Today. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Rickford J. 1987. Dimensions of a Creole Continuum: History, Texts and Linguistic Analysis of Guyanese Creole. Stanford University Press, Stanford. Rieder, B., Abdulla, R., Poell, T., Woltering, R., & Zack, L. 2015. Data critique and analytical opportunities for very large Facebook Pages: Lessons learned from exploring "We are all Khaled Said". Big Data & Society. [Online]. 2(2). [Accessed 10 January 2018]. Available from: journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/2053951715614980 Rizk, S. 2007. The Language of Cairo’s Young University Students. In: Miller, C., Al-Wer, E., Caubet, D., and Watson, J. C. E. eds. Arabic in the city: Issues in dialect contact and language variation. London: Routledge, pp. 291–308. Rosenbaum, G. M. 2000. “Fuṣḥāmmiyya”: Alternating Style in Egyptian Prose. In Zeitschrift für Arabische Linguistik [online]. 38. Harrassowitz Verlag: 68-87. [Accessed 21 February 2018]. Available from: www.jstor.org/stable/43526795. Rouchdy, A. 1992. The Arabic language in America. Detroit, Michigan: Wayne State University Press. Ryding, K. 2006. Teaching Arabic in the United States. In: Wahba, K. M., Taha, Z. A., and England, L. eds. Handbook for Arabic Language Teaching Professionals in the 21st Century. (pp. 13-20) Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. Saīd, N. Z. 1964. Tārīkh al-Da’wah ilá al-‘ammīyah wa-āthāruha fī Miṣr. Dār Nashr al-Thaqāfah: al-Iskandarīyah. Schmidt, R. 1974. Sociolinguistic Variation in Spoken Arabic in Egypt. A Reexamination of the Concept of Diglossia. PhD thesis, Brown University. Schulthies, B. 2014. Scripted Ideologies: Orthographic Heterogeneity in online Arabics. Al-‘Arabiyya. [Online]. 47, pp. 41-56. [Accessed 02 October 2017]. Available from: www.jstor.org/stable/24635372. Schulz, D. E. 1981. Diglossia and Variation in Formal Spoken Arabic in Egypt. PhD thesis, University of Wisconsin-Madison. - 182 ! Sebba, M. 2012. Multilingualism in written discourse: An approach to the analysis of multilingual texts. International Journal of Bilingualism 17(1) 97–118. Shehata, D. 2012. Youth movements of the 25 January revolution. In: Korani B. and El-Mahdi, R. (eds.) Arab spring in Egypt: revolution and beyond. (pp. 105-124) Cairo: The American University in Cairo Press. Soliman, R. K. 2014. Arabic Cross-dialectal Conversations with Implications for the Teaching of Arabic as a Second Language. Ph.D. thesis, University of Leeds. Somekh, S. 1975. Language and Theme in the Short Stories of Yūsuf Idris. Journal of Arabic Literature [online]. 6(1), 89-100. [Accessed 15 November 2018]. Available from: doi: 10.1163/157006475X00069. Spolsky, B. (ed.). 1978. Approaches to Language Testing. Arlington, VA: Centre for Applied Linguistics. Spot On Public Relations. 2010. Facebook Reach Beats Newspapers in Middle East & North Africa (Press release, English) [online]. [Accessed 14th October 2011]. Available from: www.spotonpr.com/mena-facebookdemographics/. Suleiman, Y. (1994). Arabic Sociolinguistics: Issues and Perspectives. Surrey: Curzon Press Ltd. Theodoropoulou, I. and Tyler, J. 2014. Perceptual Dialectology of the Arab World: a principal analysis. Al-‘Arabiyya. [Online] 47, 21-39. Georgetown University Press. [Accessed 02 October 2017]. Available from: http:// www.jstor.org/ Thomson, W. M. 1994. The teaching of Arabic in universities: a question of balance. Leeds: University of Leeds, Department of Modern Arabic Studies. Versteegh K. 2014. The Arabic Language. 2nd ed. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Versteegh K. 1997. The Arabic Language. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Wilmsen, D. 2006. What is Communicative Arabic? In: Wahba, K. M., Taha, Z. A., and England, L. eds. Handbook for Arabic Language Teaching - 183 ! Professionals in the 21st Century. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. pp. 125-138. Wahba, K. M. 2006. Arabic Language Use and the Educated Language User. In: Wahba, K. M., Taha, Z. A., and England, L. eds. Handbook for Arabic Language Teaching Professionals in the 21st Century. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. pp. 139-156. Wahba, K. M. [et. al.]. 2006. Handbook for Arabic Language Teaching Professionals in the 21st Century. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers Warschauer, M., Said, G. R. El., and Zohry, A. G. 2002. Language Choice Online: Globalization and Identity in Egypt. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. [Online]. 7(4). Blackwell Publishing Ltd. [Accessed 10 J a n u a r y 2 0 1 8 ] . Av a i l a b l e f r o m : h t t p : / / d x . d o i . o r g / 1 0 . 1111 / j . 1083-6101.2002.tb00157.x Watson, J.C.E. 2011. Arabic dialects (general article). In: Weninger, S., Khan, G., Streck, M.P. and Watson, J.C.E. (eds). The Semitic Languages: An international handbook. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton, pp. 851-869. Wightwick, J. & Gaafar, M. 2007. Mastering Arabic. 2nd ed. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Younes, M. 2006. Integrating the Colloquial with Fuṣḥā in the Arabic-as-aForeign-Language Classroom. In: Wahba, K. M., Taha, Z. A., and England, L. eds. Handbook for Arabic Language Teaching Professionals in the 21st Century. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. pp. 157-166. Younes, M. 1995. Elementary Arabic: an integrated approach. Student workbook. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Zack, L. 2014. Key to mass literacy or professor’s hobby? Fiske’s project to write Egyptian Arabic with the Latin alphabet. Al-Arabiyya. [Online]. 47. Georgetown University Press, pp. 1-19. [Accessed 02 October 2017]. Available from: www.jstor.org/stable/24635370. - 184 ! - List of Abbreviations CA Classical Arabic CWA Colloquial Written Arabic DL Dominant language EL Embedded language ESA Educated Spoken Arabic FB Facebook IA Intermediate Arabic IPA International Phonetic Alphabet LIA Lower Intermediate Arabic MA Middle Arabic ML Matrix language MSA Modern Standard Arabic ‫‪- 185‬‬ ‫!‬ ‫‪-‬‬ ‫‪Appendix‬‬ ‫‪Although the data set was too big to include in its entirety, the posts used in‬‬ ‫‪the study alongside additional posts are given below.‬‬ ‫‪A.1 Formal/Official posts‬‬ ‫‪Post A.1.1‬‬ ‫ﯾوﻧﯾو ‪ | 2008‬ﻓﻲ إﻋﺎدة إﻧﺗﺎج ﻟﻣﺳﻠﺳل "اﻟراﯾﺔ اﻟﺑﯾﺿﺎ" ﻟﻛن ﺗﻠك اﻟﻣرة ﻋﻠﻰ أرض اﻟواﻗﻊ‪ ..‬ﻗرر ﺷﺑﺎب ‪6‬‬ ‫أﺑرﯾل )وﻛﺎﻧوا وﻗﺗﮭﺎ ﻗﻠﺔ( اﻟﻧزول إﻟﻰ أھﺎﻟﻲ ﻋزﺑﺔ أﺑو رﺟﯾﻠﺔ‪ ،‬ﺧﻠف ﺣدﯾﻘﺔ ﺑدر‪ ،‬ﺑﻣدﯾﻧﺔ اﻟﺳﻼم‪ ،‬ﻟﻠﺗﺿﺎﻣن ﻣﻌﮭم‪،‬‬ ‫واﻟﺟﻠوس ﯾداً ﺑﯾد أﻣﺎم اﻟﺟراﻓﺎت واﻟﻣﻌدات اﻵﻟﯾﺔ اﻟﻣﺟﮭزة ﻟﮭدم اﻟﺑﯾوت واﻟﻌﺷش وﺗﺳوﯾﺗﮭﺎ ﺑﺎﻷرض‪ ،‬وطرد‬ ‫اﻷھﺎﻟﻲ ﻣﻧﮭﺎ! ﻣﺎ زﻟت أذﻛر‪ ،‬ﺑﻌد أن ﻋرﻗﻠت ھذه اﻟﺧطوة )ﺑﻔﺿل ﻣن ﷲ( ﺗﻧﻔﯾذ ھدم اﻟﺑﯾوت وطرد اﻷھﺎﻟﻲ‪،‬‬ ‫ﻋﻧدﻣﺎ ھم ﺷﺑﺎب ‪ 6‬أﺑرﯾل ﺑﺎﻟرﺣﯾل‪ ،‬ﻧﺎﺷدھم اﻷھﺎﻟﻲ اﻟﺑﻘﺎء ﺣﺗﻰ ﻻ ﺗﻐ ُدر اﻟﺣﻛوﻣﺔ ﺑﮭم ﺑﻌد أن ﯾرﺣل اﻟﺷﺑﺎب ﻋن‬ ‫اﻟﻣﻧطﻘﺔ!‬ ‫"ﻣﺎﺗﻣﺷوش‪ ،‬ھﺎﯾﻐدروا ﺑﯾﻧﺎ ﺑﻌد ﻣﺎ ﺗﻣﺷوا" ﺗﻛررت ھذه اﻟﻧداءات وﻧﺣن ﻧﻐﺎدر! ﻛﺎن ﻣدﻋﺎة ﻟﻺﺳﺗﻐراب واﻟدھﺷﺔ‬ ‫ﻋﻧدﻧﺎ‪ ،‬ﻛﯾف ان "ﺑﺿﻊ" ﻣن اﻟﺷﺑﺎب‪ ،‬وھم ﻗﻠﺔ‪ ،‬ﻧظر إﻟﯾﮭم اﻷھﺎﻟﻲ ﻋﻠﻰ أﻧﮭم ﺳﻧد وﻗوة ﻟﮭم ﺿد اﻟظﻠم واﻟﺗﻧﻛﯾل!‬ ‫رﻏم أن أھﺎﻟﻲ اﻟﻣﻧطﻘﺔ أﻛﺛر ﺑﻛﺛﯾر ﺟداً ﻋددﯾﺎ ً ﻣن ھؤﻻء اﻟﺷﺑﺎب! إﻧﮫ "اﻹﺗﺣﺎد واﻟﺗﺣدي" ھﻛذا ﻗوﻟﻧﺎ ﻟﮭم‪ ،‬ﻻ‬ ‫ﺗﺧﺷوا اﻟظﻠم وﻻ ﺗﺗﻔرﻗوا‪ ،‬وﻧﺣن ھﻧﺎ دوﻣﺎ ً ﻣﻌﻛم‪ ..‬وﺑﻔﺿل ﷲ ﺑﻘﻰ أھﺎﻟﻲ أﺑو رﺟﯾﻠﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻣﻧطﻘﺗﮭم اﻟﺑﺎﺋﺳﺔ‪،‬‬ ‫اﻟﻔﻘﯾرة‪ ،‬اﻟﺗﻲ ﺗﻌﺞ ﺑﻛل أﻧواع اﻷﻣراض واﻟﺣﺷرات وﻧﻘص اﻟﻣوارد واﻟﺧدﻣﺎت‪.‬‬ ‫]‪[Posted August 2008‬‬ ‫‪Post A.1.2‬‬ ‫ﺗﻌﻠﯾﻣﺎت ھﺎﻣﺔ ‪ -‬ﺑرﺟﺎء اﻹﺗﺑﺎع‬ ‫ﻧﺣن ھﻧﺎ ﻋﺎﺋﻠﺔ واﺣدة وﯾﻣﻛن ﻣﻧﺎﻗﺷﺔ أى ﺷﺊ ﻣﻊ إﺣﺗرام ﻛل اﻷﻋﺿﺎء اﻷﺧرﯾن ‪1-‬‬ ‫‪ -2‬ﻧرﺣب ﺑﺎﻟﻣﺻرﯾﯾن ﻓﻰ ﺷﺗﻰ ﺑﻘﺎع اﻷرض ﺑﻼ أى ﺗﻔرﯾق‬ ‫‪ -3‬ﺑرﺟﺎء ﻋدم اﻟﺧوض ﻓﻰ أى ﻣﻧﺎظرات دﯾﻧﯾﺔ أو ﻋرﻗﯾﺔ أو ﻣذھﺑﯾﺔ‬ ‫‪ -4‬ﻏﯾر ﻣﺳﻣوح ﺑﺄى ﻧﻘﺎش طﺎﺋﻔﻰ او ﻣﻘﺎرﻧﮫ ﺑﯾن اﻻدﯾﺎن‬ ‫‪ -5‬ﻛل ﻋﺿو ﻣﺳﺋول ﻣﺳﺋوﻟﯾﺔ ﻛﺎﻣﻠﺔ ﻋن ﻋن أى ﺻورة أو ﻓﯾدﯾو أو إﻋﻼن أو أى ﻣﺣﺗوى أﺧر ﯾﺗم إﺿﺎﻓﺗﮫ ﻣن‬ ‫طرﻓﮫ‬ ‫‪ -6‬ﻏﯾر ﻣﺳﻣوح ﺑﺎى دﻋﺎﯾﮫ ﺣزﺑﯾﮫ ﻣن اى ﻧوع‬ ‫‪ -7‬ﻏﯾر ﻣﺳﻣوح ﺑﺎى ﻣﺟﺎدﻟﮫ ﺑﯾن اﻻﯾدﻟوﺟﯾﺎت ﻹﺛﺑﺎت ﺻﺣﺗﮭﺎ ﻣن ﻋدﻣﮫ‬ ‫‪ -8‬ﻏﯾر ﻣﺳﻣوح ﺑﺳب اى ﺗﯾﺎر او ﻓﺻﯾل ﺳﯾﺎﺳﻰ اﯾﺎ ﻛﺎن‬ ‫‪ -9‬ﻋﻧد اﻟﺗﺟﮭﯾز ﻟﺣﻣﻠﺔ ﻣﺎ أو ﻣوﺿوع ﻣﺎ أو ﻧﻘﺎش ﻣﺎ‪ ...‬ﻏﯾر ﻣﺳﻣوع ﺑﻔﺗﺢ اى ﺗوﺑﯾﻛﺎت ﺗﺷﺗﯾت ھذا اﻟﮭدف‬ ‫‪ -10‬ﻏﯾر ﻣﺳﻣوح ﺑﺎﻟﺧروج ﻋن أداب اﻟﺣوار او اﻟﺧوص ﻓﻰ ﻣﺳﺎﺋل ﺷﺧﺻﯾﮫ‬ ‫‪ -11‬أي ﺣد ھﯾﺧﺎﻟف اﻟﺗﻌﻠﯾﻣﺎت ھﯾﺗم اﻟﻠﻐﺎء ﻋﺿوﯾﺗﮫ ﻣن اﻟﺟروب‬ ‫]‪[*At bottom of text is a logo with the words:‬‬ ‫اﻟﺷﺑﺎب اﻟﻠﻰ ﺑﺟد ‪ ...‬ﺷﺑﺎب ﺣُر ‪ ...‬ﻣش ﻋﺑد‬ ‫]‪[Dated 2 September 2010‬‬ ‫‪- 186‬‬ ‫!‬ ‫‪-‬‬ ‫‪A.2 Announcements‬‬ ‫‪Post A.2.1‬‬ ‫إﻟﻰ ﻛل ﻣن اﺧﺗﻠف ﻣﻊ ﺷﺑﺎب ‪ 6‬أﺑرﯾل إذا ﻟم ﺗﺳﺗطﻊ اﻟﻣﺷﺎرﻛﺔ ﻓﻼ ﺗﺻﺎدر ﻋﻠﻰ اﻷﺧرﯾن ﺣق اﻟﻣﺷﺎرﻛﺔ وﻻ‬ ‫ﺗﺑث اﻟﯾﺄس ﻓﻲ ﻧﻔوس ﻣن ﻟم ﯾﯾﺄس وﻣﺎزال ﻟدﯾﮫ اﻷﻣل‬ ‫]‪[Dated 2 April 2009‬‬ ‫‪Post A.2.2‬‬ ‫ﺷﺑﺎب ‪ 6‬اﺑرﯾل ﺗﻐﻠق ﺻﻔﺣﺔ اﻟﺧﻼﻓﺎت ﻧﮭﺎﺋﯾﺎ ﺑﻌد ﺧروج ﻣﺛﯾرى اﻟﻣﺷﺎﻛل ﻣن اﻟﺣرﻛﮫ‬ ‫]‪[post links to text below:‬‬ ‫ﺷﺑﺎب ‪ 6‬اﺑرﯾل ﺗﻐﻠق ﺻﻔﺣﺔ اﻟﺧﻼﻓﺎت ﻧﮭﺎﺋﯾﺎ ﺑﻌد ﺧروج ﻣﺛﯾرى اﻟﻣﺷﺎﻛل ﻣن اﻟﺣرﻛﮫ‬ ‫‪July 17, 2009 at 5:20pm‬‬ ‫ﺷﺑﺎب ‪ 6‬اﺑرﯾل ﺗﻐﻠق ﺻﻔﺣﺔ اﻟﺧﻼﻓﺎت ﻧﮭﺎﺋﯾﺎ ﺑﻌض ﺧروج ﻣﺛﯾرى اﻟﻣﺷﺎﻛل ﻣن اﻟﺣرﻛﮫ‬ ‫اﻏﻠﻘت ﺷﺑﺎب ‪ 6‬اﺑرﯾل ﺑﺎب اﻟﺧﻼﻓﺎت ﻧﮭﺎﺋﯾﺎ ﺑﻌد اﺟﺗﻣﺎع ﯾوم اﻟﺟﻣﻌﮫ ‪ 17‬ﯾوﻟﯾو ‪ 2009‬ﺣﯾث ﻛﺎﻧت اﺧر‬ ‫ﻣﺣﺎوﻻت ﻟﺟﻧﺔ اﻟطوارىء ﻟﺣل اﻻزﻣﮫ طﺑﻘﺎ ﻟﻣﺎ ﻛﺎن ﻣﺗﻔق ﻋﻠﯾﮫ ﻣﻊ اﻟﻣﻧﺳق اﻟﻌﺎم ﻟﻠﺣرﻛﮫ أﺣﻣد ﻣﺎھر‪ ..‬و ﻟﻛن‬ ‫ﻓوﺟﻰء اﻻﻋﺿﺎء ﺑﺗﻛرار ﺣﺿور اﻋﺿﺎء ﻣﺟﮭوﻟون ﻟﻠﺗﺻوﯾت و ﻣﻧﻌت ﻣﺟﻣوﻋﺔ ﺣزب اﻟﻌﻣل و ﻣﺛﯾرى‬ ‫اﻟﻣﺷﺎﻛل اﻟﻌدﯾد ﻣن اﻻﻋﺿﺎء اﻟﺣﻘﯾﻘﯾﯾن ﻣن ﺣﺿور اﻻﺟﺗﻣﺎع ﻣن ﺿﻣﻧﮭم ﻣؤﺳس و ﻣﻧﺳق اﻟﺣرﻛﮫ م‪ -‬أﺣﻣد‬ ‫ﻣﺎھر ﺑﮭدف ﻣﻧﻊ اﻋﺿﺎء اﻟﺣرﻛﮫ اﻟﺣﻘﯾﻘﯾﯾن ﻣن اﻟﺗﺻوﯾت‪ ..‬ﻓﻣﺎ ﻛﺎن ﻣن اﻋﺿﺎء اﻟﺣرﻛﮫ اﻻ ان ﻏﺎدروا اﻟﻣﻛﺎن‬ ‫وﻗرروا ﻋﻘدوا اﺟﺗﻣﺎﻋﮭم ﻓﻰ ﻣﻛﺎن اﺧر و اﻋﻠن اﻛﺛر ﻣن ‪ 80‬ﻋﺿو ﻣﺳﺟﻠون ﻓﻰ اﻟﺟﻣﻌﯾﮫ اﻟﻌﻣوﻣﯾﮫ ﺗﺟﺎھﻠﮭم‬ ‫ﻟﻣﺟﻣوﻋﺔ اﻟﺣزﺑﯾﯾن و ﻣﺛﯾرى اﻟﻣﺷﺎﻛل ﻧﮭﺎﺋﯾﺎ و اﺳﺗﺋﻧﺎف ﺗرﺗﯾب اوراق اﻟﺣرﻛﮫ و اﻟﺑدء ﻓﻰ اﻟﻌﻣل و اﻧﮭم ﻻ‬ ‫ﯾﻣﺛﻠون اﻟﺣرﻛﮫ ﺑﺄى ﺣﺎل ﻣن اﻻﺣوال و ﻟﯾس ﻟﮭم اى ﺣق ﻓﻰ اﻟﺣدﯾث ﺑﺈﺳﻣﮭﺎ أو اﻟﻌﺿوﯾﮫ ﻓﻰ أﯾﺎ ﻣن‬ ‫ﺗﺷﻛﯾﻼﺗﮭﺎ ‪ .‬و اﻧﮭم ارﺗﻛﺑوا ﻓﻰ ﺣق اﻟﺣرﻛﮫ اﻛﺑر ﺟرﯾﻣﮫ ﺑﺈﺳﺗﺧداﻣﮭم اﺳﻠوب اﻟﺗﺷﮭﯾر و ﺗﺷوﯾﮫ ﺳﻣﻌﺔ اﻟﺣرﻛﮫ‬ ‫ﻓﻰ وﺳﺎﺋل اﻻﻋﻼم ﻣن اﺟل ﺗﺣﻘﯾق ﻣﺻﺎﻟﺢ ﺷﺧﺻﯾﮫ و ﺣزﺑﯾﮫ ﻟﻠﺳﯾطره ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﺣرﻛﮫ ‪ ..‬و اﻧﮭم ﻟﯾﺳوا ﻣن‬ ‫اﻋﺿﺎء اﻟﺣرﻛﮫ و ﺧﺻوﺻﺎ ان ﻋددھم ﻻ ﯾﺗﻌدى ‪ 13‬ﺷﺧص ﻣﻌظﻣﮭم ﻣن ﺣزب اﻟﻌﻣل و ﺑﻌض اﻟﻣﻧﺗﻔﻌﯾن و‬ ‫اﻟﻣﻘرﺑﯾن و ﻧﺧص ﺑﺎﻟذﻛر ﺿﯾﺎء اﻟﺻﺎوى و ﻣﺣﻣد ﻋﺑداﻟﻌزﯾز و وﻟﯾد ﺧﯾرى و ﻧوراﻟدﯾن ﺣﻣدى و ﺷﻣس‬ ‫اﻟﻔﺧﺎﺧرى و ﺑﺎﻗﻰ اﻋﺿﺎء ﺣزب اﻟﻌﻣل‬ ‫وﻛذﻟك اﺗﻔق ﻏﺎﻟﺑﯾﺔ اﻋﺿﺎء ﺣرﻛﺔ ﺷﺑﺎب ‪ 6‬اﺑرﯾل ﺑﺄن ﻣﺟﻣوﻋﺔ ﻟن ﺗﻣروا ﻟﮭم ﻛل اﻟﺣرﯾﮫ ﻓﻰ اﺳﺗﻘﻼﻟﮭم و‬ ‫ﺗﻛوﯾن ﺣرﻛﺗﮭم ﺑﺄى ﻣﺳﻣﻰ طﺑﻘﺎ ﻻھداﻓﮭم و اﺳﺎﻟﯾﺑﮭم اﻟﻣﺧﺗﻠﻔﮫ ﻋن ﻏﺎﻟﺑﯾﺔ اﻋﺿﺎء ﺷﺑﺎب ‪ 6‬اﺑرﯾل و ﻟﮭم ﻛل‬ ‫اﻟﺣق ﻓﻰ اﻻﻧﺿﻣﺎم ﻟﺣزب اﻟﻌﻣل او اى ﺣزب او ﺣرﻛﮫ أﺧرى‬ ‫وﻛذﻟك ﺗم اﻻﺗﻔﺎق ﻋﻠﻰ ﺟدول زﻣﻧﻰ ﻟﻼﻧﺷطﮫ اﻟﻘﺎدﻣﮫ ﺧﻼل اﻟﻌﺎم اﻟﻘﺎدم و ﺗم اﻻﺗﻔﺎق ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﺟﻣوﻋﺎت اﻟﻌﻣل‬ ‫اﻟﺟدﯾده و اﻟﻣﺳﺋوﻟﯾﺎت ﻻﺳﺗﺋﻧﺎف اﻻﻧﺷطﮫ اﻟﺗﻰ ﻋطﻠﺗﮭﺎ ﻣﺟﻣوﻋﺔ ﻟن ﺗﻣروا ﺑﺈﺻرارھم ﻋﻠﻰ اﺳﺗﻣرار اﺛﺎرة‬ ‫اﻟﻣﺷﺎﻛل اﻟداﺧﻠﯾﮫ‪.‬‬ ‫ﻛﻣﺎ ﺷﻛر اﻋﺿﺎء ﺣرﻛﺔ ﺷﺑﺎب ‪ 6‬اﺑرﯾل ﻟﺟﻧﺔ اﻟطوارىء ﻋﻠﻰ إﺗﻣﺎم دورھﺎ اﻟذى اﻧﻌﻘدت ﻣن اﺟﻠﮫ و اﻟذى اﻧﺗﮭﻰ‬ ‫ﺑﺣﺻر اﻻﻋﺿﺎء و اﻟدﻋوه ﻟﻠﺟﻣﻌﯾﮫ اﻟﻌﻣوﻣﯾﮫ ‪.‬‬ ‫و ﻓﻰ ﻧﮭﺎﯾﺔ اﻟﯾوم واﻓق اﻛﺛر ﻣن ‪ 80‬ﻋﺿو ﻣن اﻋﺿﺎء اﻟﺟﻣﻌﯾﮫ اﻟﻌﻣوﻣﯾﮫ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﺑﯾﺎن اﻟﺗﺄﺳﯾﺳﻰ اﻟﺗﺎﻟﻰ‬ ‫ﺷﺑﺎب ‪ 6‬اﺑرﯾل‬ ‫اﻟﺑﯾﺎن اﻟﺗﺄﺳﯾﺳﻰ اﻷول‬ ‫ﻣن ﻧﺣن؟‬ ‫ﻣﺟﻣوﻋﮫ ﻣن اﻟﺷﺑﺎب اﻟﻣﺻرى ﻣن ﻣﺧﺗﻠف اﻻﻋﻣﺎر و اﻻﺗﺟﺎھﺎت ﺗﺟﻣﻌﻧﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣدار ﻋﺎم ﻛﺎﻣل ﻣﻧذ أن ﺗﺟدد‬ ‫‪- 187‬‬ ‫!‬ ‫‬‫اﻻﻣل ﯾوم ‪ 6‬اﺑرﯾل ‪ 2008‬ﻓﻰ إﻣﻛﺎﻧﯾﺔ ﺣدوث ﻋﻣل ﺟﻣﺎﻋﻰ ﻓﻰ ﻣﺻر ﯾﺳﺎھم ﻓﯾﮫ اﻟﺷﺑﺎب ﻣﻊ ﻛﺎﻓﺔ ﻓﺋﺎت و‬ ‫طﺑﻘﺎت اﻟﻣﺟﺗﻣﻊ ﻓﻰ ﻛﺎﻓﺔ اﻧﺣﺎء اﻟوطن ﻣن أﺟل اﻟﺧروج ﺑﮫ ﻣن ازﻣﺗﮫ و اﻟوﺻول ﺑﮫ ﻟﻣﺳﺗﻘﺑل دﯾﻣﻘراطﻰ‬ ‫ﯾﺗﺟﺎوز ﺣﺎﻟﺔ اﻧﺳداد اﻵﻓﺎق اﻟﺳﯾﺎﺳﯾﮫ و اﻻﻗﺗﺻﺎدﯾﮫ واﻻﺟﺗﻣﺎﻋﯾﮫ اﻟﺗﻰ ﯾﻘف ﻋﻧدھﺎ اﻟوطن اﻵن‬ ‫ﻟم ﯾﺄت اﻏﻠﺑﻧﺎ ﻣن ﺧﻠﻔﯾﮫ ﺳﯾﺎﺳﯾﮫ ﻣﺎ و ﻟم ﯾﻣﺎرس اﻏﻠﺑﻧﺎ اﻟﻌﻣل اﻟﺳﯾﺎﺳﻰ أو اﻟﻌﻣل اﻟﻌﺎم ﻗﺑل ‪ 6‬اﺑرﯾل ‪ 2008‬و‬ ‫ﻟﻛﻧﻧﺎ اﺳﺗطﻌﻧﺎ ﺿﺑط ﺑوﺻﻠﺗﻧﺎ و ﺗﺣدﯾد اﺗﺟﺎھﻧﺎ ﻣن ﺧﻼل اﻟﻣﻣﺎرﺳﮫ اﺛﻧﺎء ذﻟك اﻟﻌﺎم‪.‬‬ ‫ﻣﺎذا ﻧرﯾد؟؟‬ ‫ﻧرﯾد أن ﻧﺻل إﻟﻰ ﻣﺎ اﺗﻔق ﻋﻠﯾﮫ ﻛﺎﻓﺔ اﻟﻣﻔﻛرﯾن اﻟﻣﺻرﯾﯾن و أﻗرﺗﮫ ﻛﺎﻓﺔ اﻟﻘوى اﻟﺳﯾﺎﺳﯾﮫ اﻟوطﻧﯾﮫ ﻣن ﺿرورة‬ ‫ﻣرور ﻣﺻر ﺑﻔﺗره اﻧﺗﻘﺎﻟﯾﮫ ﯾﻛون ﻓﯾﮭﺎ اﻟﺣﻛم ﻻﺣد اﻟﺷﺧﺻﯾﺎت اﻟﻌﺎﻣﮫ اﻟﺗﻰ ﯾﺗم اﻟﺗواﻓق ﻋﻠﯾﮭﺎ ﻣن اﺟل ﺻﺎﻟﺢ ھذا‬ ‫اﻟوطن و ﻛراﻣﺗﮫ و ﯾﺗم إرﺳﺎء ﻣﺑﺎدىء اﻟﺣﻛم اﻟدﯾﻣﻘراطﻰ اﻟرﺷﯾد‬ ‫و ﻣن أھم ﻣﻼﻣﺢ ﺗﻠك اﻟﻔﺗرھم اطﻼق اﻟﺣرﯾﺎت اﻟﻌﺎﻣﮫ و ﻗواﻋد اﻟﻣﻣﺎرﺳﮫ اﻟﺳﯾﺎﺳﯾﮫ اﻟدﯾﻣﻘراطﯾﮫ اﻟﺳﻠﯾﻣﮫ و ان‬ ‫ﺗﺗﻛون اﻟﻛﯾﺎﻧﺎت اﻟﺳﯾﺎﺳﯾﮫ و اﻻﺟﺗﻣﺎﻋﯾﮫ و ﻏﯾرھﺎ ﺑﻣﺟرد اﻹﺧطﺎر‬ ‫ﻛﯾف ﯾﺣدث ذﻟك؟؟‬ ‫ﻋن طرﯾق اﻟﺳﯾر ﻓﻰ ﻣﺳﺎرﯾن ﻣﺗوازﯾﯾن ﻻ ﯾﻣﻛن اﻻﺳﺗﻐﻧﺎء ﻋن اﺣدھﻣﺎ‬ ‫اوﻟﮭﻣﺎ ھو اﻟﺑﺣث اﻟﺟﯾد ﻋن اﻟﺑدﯾل اﻟذى ﺗﻌﻣد اﻟﺣﻛم اﻟﺳﻠطوى ﺗﻐﯾﯾﺑﮫ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣدار ﺳﻧوات طوﯾﻠﮫ ﻟﯾﻣﺛل رأس‬ ‫اﻟﺣرﺑﮫ ﻓﻰ ﻣﻌرﻛﺔ اﻟﺗﺣول اﻟدﯾﻣﻘراطﻰ ﻓﻰ ﻣﺻر‬ ‫و ﺛﺎﻧﯾﮭﻣﺎ ھو إﻋﺎدة اﻟﺛﻘﮫ إﻟﻰ اﻟﺟﻣﺎھﯾر اﻟﻣﺻرﯾﮫ ﻓﻰ ﻛل ﻣﻛﺎن ﻓﻰ اﻣﻛﺎﻧﯾﮫ إﺧﺗﯾﺎر ﻣﺻﯾرھﺎ و ﺣﺛﮭﺎ ﻓﻰ‬ ‫اﻟﻣﺷﺎرﻛﮫ ﻓﻰ ﺗﺣدﯾد ذﻟك اﻟﻣﺻﯾر ﺑﻛل اﻟوﺳﺎﺋل‬ ‫و ﺗﻧﺗﮭﺞ اﻟﺣرﻛﮫ ﻋﻣوﻣﺎ طرﯾق اﻟﻣﻘﺎوﻣﮫ اﻟﺳﻠﻣﯾﮫ و اﺳﺗراﺗﯾﺟﯾﺎت ﺣرب اﻟﻼﻋﻧف وﻻ ﻧرى ﻣﺎﻧﻊ ﻣن اﻟﻣروﻧﮫ و‬ ‫اﻟﺗﻧوع ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﺳﺗوى اﻟﺗﻛﺗﯾﻛﺎت ﺑﯾن ﻣﺎ ھو ﺟذرى و ﻣﺎ ھو اﺻﻼﺣﻰ ﻟﺗﺣﻘﯾق اﻟﮭدف اﻟﻧﮭﺎﺋﻰ و ھو اﻟﺗﻐﯾﯾر‬ ‫اﻟﺳﻠﻣﻰ‬ ‫ﻋﻼﻗﺗﻧﺎ ﺑﺎﻟﻘوى اﻟﺳﯾﺎﺳﯾﮫ اﻟﻣﺻرﯾﮫ‬ ‫رﻏم ان ﻗواﻣﻧﺎ اﻟرﺋﯾﺳﻰ ﻣن اﻟﺷﺑﺎب اﻟﻣﺳﺗﻘل ﻋن اى ﺣزب او ﺗﯾﺎر إﻻ ان ﻋﻼﻗﺗﻧﺎ ﺑﺎﻷﺣزاب و اﻟﻘوى اﻟﺳﯾﺎﺳﯾﮫ‬ ‫ھﻰ ﻋﻼﻗﮫ اﺣﺗرام و ﺗﻌﺎون ﻣﺗﺑﺎدل ﻓﻰ اطﺎر اﻟﺣﻣﻼت اﻟﻣﺧﺗﻠﻔﮫ واﻟﻌﻣل اﻟﺟﺑﮭوى ﺑﯾﻧﻧﺎ و ﺑﯾن ﺷﺑﺎب اﻷﺣزاب و‬ ‫اﻟﺗﯾﺎرات اﻟﺳﯾﺎﺳﯾﮫ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﺣد اﻻدﻧﻰ اﻟﻣﺷﺗرك ﻣﻊ اﻟﺗﺷدﯾد ﻋﻠﻰ اﺳﺗﻘﻼﻟﯾﺔ اﻓﻛﺎرﻧﺎ و ﻋدم ﺗﻠوﻧﮭﺎ ﺑﯾﺄى ﻟون ﺣزﺑﻰ‬ ‫او اﯾدوﻟوﺟﻰ‬ ‫و ﻧﺷدد ﻋﻠﻰ أﻧﻧﺎ ﻟﺳﻧﺎ ﺗﺎﺑﻌﯾن ﻷى ﺣزب أو ﺗﯾﺎر ﺳﯾﺎﺳﻰ أو ﺣرﻛﮫ ﺳﯾﺎﺳﯾﮫ ﺳواء ﻛﻧﺎ ﻣﺗﻔﻘﯾن ﻣﻌﮭم ﻓﻰ اﻻﻓﻛﺎر أو‬ ‫اﻷﺳﺎﻟﯾب أو ﻣﺧﺗﻠﻔﯾن‬ ‫ﻋﻼﻗﺗﻧﺎ ﺑﺎﻟﺧﺎرج‬ ‫ﻧﻌﺗﻘد اﻧﮫ ﻣن اﻟﺧطﺎ ان ﻧذﻛر ﻛﻠﻣﺔ اﻟﺧﺎرج ﻛﻠﻔظ ﻣﺑﮭم ﺑدون ﺗﻔﺻﯾل‬ ‫ﻓﺎﻟﺧﺎرج ﯾﻧﻘﺳم إﻟﻰ ﺣﻛوﻣﺎت و ﺷﻌوب و ﻣﻧظﻣﺎت ﻣﺟﺗﻣﻊ ﻣدﻧﻰ‬ ‫و ﻧﺣن ﻧرﻓض اى ﺗﻌﺎﻣل ﻣﻊ اﻟﺣﻛوﻣﺎت اﻷﺟﻧﺑﯾﮫ و ﻟﻛن ﻧرى أﻧﮫ ﻓﻰ ﻋﺻر اﻟﻣﻌﻠوﻣﺎت و اﻻﻧﺗرﻧت أﻧﮫ ﯾﺟب‬ ‫اﻹﻧﻔﺗﺎح ﻋﻠﻰ ﻛل اﻟﺗﺟﺎرب و اﻟﺧﺑرات و اﻟﺗﻌﻠم ﻣﻣﺎ ﯾﻔﯾدﻧﺎ‬ ‫ﻓﻧﺣن ﻻ ﻧﻌﯾش ﻓﻰ ھذا اﻟﻌﺎﻟم ﺑﻣﻔردﻧﺎ ‪..‬ﻣﺎ ﯾﺣدث ﻓﻲ ﻣﺻر ﯾؤﺛر ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﻌﺎﻟم وﻣﺎ ﯾﺣدث ﻓﻲ اﻟﻌﺎﻟم ﯾؤﺛر ﻋﻠﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﺻر‬ ‫وﯾﻧﺑﻐﻰ اﻟﺗﺧﻠص ﻣن اﻷﻓﻛﺎر اﻟﺗﻰ ﺻدرھﺎ اﻟﻧظﺎم اﻟﻘﻣﻌﻰ ﻟﻧﺎ ﻣن إﻧﻐﻼق و ﻋدم إﻧﻔﺗﺎح ﻋﻠﻰ ﺗﺟﺎرب اﻷﺧرﯾن‪.‬‬ ‫و ﻧرﻓض اﻟﺗﺄﺛر ﺑﺗﻠك اﻻﻓﻛﺎر اﻟﻣﻧﻐﻠﻘﮫ و اﻟﻣﻔﺎھﯾم اﻟﺑﺎﻟﯾﮫ ﻣﺛل ﺑﻌض اﻟﻔﺻﺎﺋل اﻟﺳﯾﺎﺳﯾﮫ‬ ‫وﻧﻌﺗﺑر أن دﻋﺎوى ﻟﻺﻧﻐﻼق ﺗﺣد ﻣن ﺛراء اﻟﺣرﻛﺔ اﻟﻔﻛري وﺛراء اﻟﺧﺑرة واﻟﺗﺟﺎرب‬ ‫و ﻧرﺣب ﺑﺗﺑﺎدل اﻟﺧﺑرات ﺑﯾﻧﻧﺎ و ﺑﯾن اﻟﺣرﻛﺎت اﻟﻣﺷﺎﺑﮭﮫ اﻟﺳﺎﺑﻘﮫ ﻣﻧﮭﺎ و اﻟﺣﻠﯾﮫ و ﻧرﺣب ﺑﺎﻟﺗﻌﺎون ﻣﻊ ﻣﻧظﻣﺎت‬ ‫اﻟﻣﺟﺗﻣﻊ اﻟﻣدﻧﻰ ﻓﻰ إطﺎر اﻟﺗﺿﺎﻣن اﻟﺣﻘوﻗﻰ و اﻻﻋﺎﻟﻣﻰ و اﻟﺗدرﯾب و اﻟﺗﻌﻠم‬ ‫ﻣﻊ اﻟﺗﺷدﯾد ﻋﻠﻰ اﻻﺣﺗﻔﺎظ ﺑﺈﺳﺗﻘﻼﻟﯾﺗﻧﺎ و ﻋدم ﻓرض اى اﺟﻧدات او اﻓﻛﺎر ﻋﻠﯾﻧﺎ ﻣن اى طرف أﯾﺎ ﻛﺎن‬ ‫‪- 188‬‬ ‫!‬ ‫‬‫ﺗﻣوﯾﻠﻧﺎ‬ ‫ﻧﻌﺗﻣد ﻋﻠﻰ ﺗﺑرﻋﺎت اﻻﻋﺿﺎء ﻛﻣﺻدر اﺳﺎﺳﻰ ﻟﻠﺗﻣوﯾل‪..‬‬ ‫و ﻧرﻓض اﻟﺗﻣوﯾل اﻟﻣﺎﻟﻰ اﻟﺧﺎرﺟﻰ‬ ‫ﺷﺑﺎب ﻣﺻر‬ ‫ﺷﺑﺎب ﺣر‬ ‫ﻣﺎﺗﺳﺑش ﺣﻘك ﺷﺎرك وﻛﻔﺎﯾﺔ ﺳﻠﺑﯾﺔ اﻟﻠﻰ ﺑﯾﺣﺻل ﻓﻰ ﺑﻠدﻧﺎ ﻣش ﺷوﯾﺔ‬ ‫]‪[Dated 17 July 2009‬‬ ‫‪Post A.2.3‬‬ ‫ﺷﺑﺎب ‪ 6‬أﺑرﯾل ﯾداً ﺑﯾد ﻣﻊ ﺷﺑﺎب ﺣﻣﻠﺔ اﻟﺑرادﻋﻲ وﺷﺑﺎب اﻟﺣرﯾﺔ واﻟﻌداﻟﺔ‬ ‫]‪[Dated 26 November 2010‬‬ ‫‪Post A.2.4‬‬ ‫ﺧﺎﻟص اﻟﺗﻌﺎزي ﻣﻧﻧﺎ ﻷﺳرة واﻟد اﻟﺷﮭﯾد ﯾﺎﺳر ﺷﻌﯾب ﺑدﻣﯾﺎط‬ ‫]‪[Dated June 27 2012‬‬ ‫‪Post A.2.5‬‬ ‫ﻟم ﻧﻧﺳﻰ ‪ 12‬اﻟف ﻣﻌﺗﻘل ﻓﻰ ﺳﺟون اﻟﻌﺳﻛر‪....‬اﻓرﺟوا ﻋن ﻣﻌﺗﻘﻠﻰ اﻟﺛورة‬ ‫]‪[Dated June 28 2012‬‬ ‫‪A.3 Knowledge, learning and religion‬‬ ‫‪Post A.3.1‬‬ ‫اﻗرأ‪ْ ..‬ﺗﺣرّ ر‬ ‫]‪[Dated 23 June 2012‬‬ ‫‪Post A.3.2‬‬ ‫ﯾﺎ اھﻠﻲ وﻋﺷﯾرﺗﻲ ‪ ..‬اذا ﻛﻧﺗم ﺗرﯾدون اﻟﻧﮭﺿﺔ ﻓﻌﻼ‪ ،‬ﻓﻌﻠﯾﻛم ﺑﺎﻟﻘراءة واﻟﺗﻌﻣق ﻓﻲ ﺑﺣور اﻟﻌﻠم وﻛﻧوز اﻟﻣﻌرﻓﺔ ‪..‬‬ ‫ﻓﺎﻟﻌﻠم واﻟﻌﻣل اﻟﺟﺎد ھﻣﺎ اﺳﺎس اﻟﻧﮭﺿﺔ‬ ‫]‪[Dated 26 June 2012‬‬ ‫‪Post A.3.3‬‬ ‫أﺗﻣﻧﻲ أن ﯾﺻل اﻟدﯾن إﻟﻲ أھل اﻟﺳﯾﺎﺳﺔ‪ ..‬وﻻ ﯾﺻل أھل اﻟدﯾن إﻟﻲ اﻟﺳﯾﺎﺳﺔ | ﻓﺿﯾﻠﺔ اﻟﺷﯾﺦ ﻣﺣﻣد ﻣﺗوﻟﻲ‬ ‫اﻟﺷﻌراوي‬ ‫]‪[Dated 22 March 2011‬‬ ‫‪Post A.3.4‬‬ ‫ﻛن إﻧﺳﺎﻧﺎ ً | ﻗﺎل ﺗﻌﺎﻟﻰ‪ ،‬ورﺣﻣﺗﻲ وﺳﻌت ﻛل ﺷﻰء‬ ‫]‪[Dated 14 December 2011‬‬ ‫‪- 189‬‬ ‫!‬ ‫‪-‬‬ ‫)‪A.4 Photo and video captions (pre-December 2010‬‬ ‫‪Post A.4.1‬‬ ‫ﻣؤﺗﻣر ﺷﺑﺎب ‪ 6‬إﺑرﯾل‬ ‫ﺗﻐطﯾﺔ ﻟﻠﻣؤﺗﻣر اﻷول‪ - 28/06/2008‬اﻟﻌﺎﺷرة ﻣﺳﺎءاً‬ ‫]‪[Undated‬‬ ‫‪Post A.4.2‬‬ ‫ﺷﺑﺎب ‪ 6‬إﺑرﯾل ﻣﻊ ﻓﻼﺣﻰ ﺳراﻧدو‬ ‫ﻣﺳﺎﻧدة ﺷﺑﺎب ‪ 6‬إﺑرﯾل ﻟﻔﻼﺣﻰ ﺳراﻧدو‬ ‫]‪[Dated 31 August 2008‬‬ ‫‪Post A.4.3‬‬ ‫ﺷﺑﺎب ‪ 6‬إﺑرﯾل ‪ -‬ﻣﺎذا ﺣدث ﻓﻰ اﻹﺳﻛﻧدرﯾﺔ‬ ‫اﻟﻣوﻗف‬ ‫أزﻣﺔ إﻋﺗﻘﺎﻻت ﯾوم ‪ 23‬ﯾوﻟﯾو وﺗﻌﺎﻣل ﺷﺑﺎب ‪ 6‬إﺑرﯾل ﻣﻊ‬ ‫]‪[Dated 2 September 2008‬‬ ‫‪Post A.4.4‬‬ ‫ﻣظﺎھرة ﻓﻰ ﺟﺎﻣﻌﺔ اﻟﻘﺎھرة ﻟﻠﻣطﺎﻟﺑﺔ ﺑﺈﺧراج اﻷﻣن ﻣن اﻟﺣرم اﻟﺟﺎﻣﻌﻰ‪ ,‬اﻟﻣﺷﺎرﻛون )ﺣرﻛﺔ ﺷﺑﺎب ‪ 6‬إﺑرﯾل ‪-‬‬ ‫ﺣرﻛﺔ ﺣﻘﻰ ‪ -‬راﺑطﺔ ﺷﺑﺎب ﺣزب اﻟﻌﻣل ‪ -‬راﺑطﺔ طﻼب ﺣزب اﻟﻌﻣل ‪ -‬طﻼب اﻹﺧوان اﻟﻣﺳﻠﻣﯾن(‪ ,‬اﻟﺗﺎرﯾﺦ‬ ‫‪21‬‬ ‫]‪[“Students Day” photo caption dated 24 February 2009‬‬ ‫‪Post A.4.5‬‬ ‫أﻛﺑر ﻣظﺎھرة ﻟﻠﻘوى اﻟوطﻧﯾﺔ ﺿد ﺗزوﯾر اﻻﻧﺗﺧﺎﺑﺎت أﻣﺎم اﻟﻘﺿﺎء اﻟﻌﺎﻟﻲ‬ ‫]‪[Dated December 12, 2010‬‬ ‫‪Post A.4.6‬‬ ‫ﻓﯾدﯾو ﻧﺎدر ﻹﺳﻘﺎط ﻻﻓﺗﺔ ﺿﺧﻣﺔ ﻟﻠرﺋﯾس ﻣﺑﺎرك ﻣن ﻣدوﻧﺔ اﻟوﻋﻰ اﻟﻣﺻري ﻣن ذﻛرﯾﺎت إﺿراب اﻟﻣﺣﻠﺔ‬ ‫اﻟﻛﺑرى ﻓﻲ ‪ 6‬أﺑرﯾل ‪ ..2008‬ﺷﻌب اﻟﻣﺣﻠﺔ ﻛﺎن ﻛﺎﻟﺟﻣوع اﻟﮭﺎدرة‪ ,‬واﻟﺷرطﺔ ﺗﻘف ﺑل ﺣراك ﺧوﻓﺎ ً ﻣن ﺑطش‬ ‫اﻟﺟﻣﺎھﯾر!‬ ‫]‪[Dated 19 January 2011‬‬ ‫‪Post A.4.7‬‬ ‫ﺑﺎﻷﻣس ﺧرج اﻟﻣﺻرﯾون ﻓﻲ ﻧﯾوﯾورك ﻟﻠﺗظﺎھر ورﻓﻊ إﻋﻼم ﻣﺻر وﻻﻓﺗﺎت ﯾوم اﻹﻧﺗﻔﺎﺿﺔ اﻟﻣﺻرﯾﺔ‪ ,‬ﻟﺗدﻋﯾم‬ ‫إﺧواﻧﮭم ﻓﻲ اﻟداﺧل اﻟذﯾن ﺳﯾﻧزﻟون ﻓﻲ ﻛل أﻧﺣﺎء اﻟوطن ﻟﻠﻣطﺎﻟﺑﺔ ﺑﺣﻘوﻗﻧﺎ اﻟﻣﺷروﻋﺔ ﻓﻲ ‪ 25‬ﯾﻧﺎﯾر‪ ..‬ﺷﻛراً‬ ‫ﻟﻠﻣﺻرﯾﯾن ﻓﻲ ﻧﯾوﯾورك وﺷﻛراً ﻟزﻣﯾﻠﻧﺎ اﻟﻌزﯾز أﻟﯾﻛس ﻓرج ﻋﻠﻰ ارﺳﺎﻟﮫ ھذا اﻻﻟﺑوم ﻟﻧﺎ‬ ‫]‪[Dated 24 January 2011‬‬ ‫‪Post A.4.8‬‬ ‫‪- 190‬‬ ‫!‬ ‫‬‫ﺟدارﯾﺎت‪ ,‬رﺳوﻣﺎت‪ ,‬وﺷﻌﺎرات ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﺣواﺋط واﻟﻧواﻓذ واﻟﺳﯾﺎرات ﺗؤرخ ﻟﻠﺛورة اﻟﻠﯾﺑﯾﺔ اﻟﻌظﯾﻣﺔ‪ ,‬ﺗﺣﻣل ﻓﻲ‬ ‫طﯾﺎﺗﮭﺎ اﻷﻣل ﻓﻲ اﻟﺣرﯾﺔ‪ ,‬واﻟﺻﺑر ﻓﻲ ﻣواﺟﮭﺔ اﻟﻔﺎﺳدﯾن‪ ,‬واﻷﻛﺛر ﻣن ذﻟك روح اﻟﺷﺑﺎب واﻟﺗﺣدي ﻟدﯾﻛﺗﺎﺗور‬ ‫ﻣﺧﺗل اﻹدراك ظل ﯾُﺣدث ﺷﻌﺑﮫ ﻟــ ‪ 40‬ﻋﺎﻣﺎ ً ﻋن اﻟﺛورة‪ ..‬ﺣﺗﻰ ﺛﺎر اﻟﺷﻌب ﻋﻠﯾﮫ‬ ‫]‪[Dated 17 March 2011‬‬ ‫‪Post A.4.9‬‬ ‫ﻻ ﻓرق ﻋﻧدي ﺑﯾن ﻣن زوّ ر أﺻوات اﻟﻧﺎﺧﺑﯾن ﺑﺷﻛل ﻣﺑﺎﺷر ﻛﻣﺎ ﻛﺎن ﯾﻔﻌل ﻋز ورﻓﺎﻗﮫ‪ ,‬وﺑﯾن ﻣن زوّ ر إرادة‬ ‫اﻷﻣﺔ‪ ,‬وأﺳﺗﻐل رﻗﺔ ﺣﺎل‪ ,‬وﻗﻠﺔ وﻋﻰ أﺑﻧﺎءھﺎ‪ ..‬وﺣوّ ل اﻹﺳﺗﻔﺗﺎء ﺑﺎﻟﺗﺿﻠﯾل واﻟﺑُﮭﺗﺎن ﻣن ﻧﻌم وﻻ ﻟﻠﺗﻌدﯾﻼت‬ ‫اﻟدﺳﺗورﯾﺔ ﻟﯾﺟﻌﻠﮫ ﻧﻌم وﻻ ﻟﻺﺳﻼم ﻟﯾﺳﺗﻧﻔر اﻟﺑﺳطﺎء وﯾﺗﻼﻋب ﺑﻣﺷﺎﻋرھم‪ ,‬وﻣﺛﻠﮫ ﻣن إﺳﺗﻐل ﺣُب اﻟﻣﺳﯾﺣﯾﯾن‬ ‫ﻟﻠﻣﺳﯾﺢ وﻓﻌل ﻧﻔس اﻟﺷﻰء ﻟﯾﺟﻌل اﻹﺳﺗﻔﺗﺎء ﻻ ﻣن أﺟل اﻟﻣﺳﯾﺢ وﻧﻌم ﺿده!! أﻧﺗم ﺗﻘﺳّﻣون ﺷﻌﺑﻧﺎ وﺗﻘﺗﻠون اﻟﺣﻠم‬ ‫]‪[Dated 20 March 2011‬‬ ‫‪Post A.4.10‬‬ ‫ظﺑﺎط وﺟﻧود ﺟﯾش ﻣﺻر اﻟﻌظﯾم‪ ,‬وﺗﻌﻠﯾﻣﺎت ﻗﺎﺋد اﻟﻛﺗﯾﺑﺔ اﻟﻣﺻري اﻟراﺋﻊ ﻟﻠﺟﻧود ﻗﺑﯾل اﻹﺷراف ﻋﻠﻰ ﺻﻧﺎدﯾق‬ ‫اﻹﺳﺗﻔﺗﺎء‪ ..‬ﻛﻠﻣﺎﺗﮫ ﯾﺣق ﻟﮭﺎ أن ُﺗﻛﺗﺑت ﺑﺣروف اﻟﻧور ﻋﻠﻰ ﺻﻔﺣﺎت اﻟذھب‪ ..‬راﺋﻊ ﺟداً‬ ‫]‪[Dated 24 March 2011‬‬ ‫‪Post A.4.11‬‬ ‫ﺻﺑﺎح اﻟﺧﯾر‬ ‫ھﻧﺗﻛﻠم اﻟﻧﮭﺎردة ﻋن ﻟﻘﺎء اﻟﻠواء اﻟﻌﺻﺎر و اﻟﻠواء ﺣﺟﺎزي ) ﻧﯾﺎﺑﺔ ﻋن اﻟﻣﺟﻠس اﻟﻌﺳﻛري ( ﻣﻊ اﻻﻋﻼﻣﯾﯾن‬ ‫اﺑراھﯾم ﻋﯾﺳﻰ و ﻣﻧﻰ اﻟﺷﺎذﻟﻲ ﻓﻰ اﻟﻠﻘﺎء اﻟﻠﻲ اﻏﻠﺑﻛم ﺷﺎﻓوه‬ ‫اﯾﮫ اﻧطﺑﺎﻋﺗﻛم ﻋن اﻟﻠﻘﺎء ؟ و اﯾﮫ اﻻﺳﺋﻠﺔ اﻟﻠﻲ ﻟﻘﯾﺗوﻟﮭﺎ اﺟﺎﺑﺔ ؟ و اﯾﮫ اﻻﺳﺋﻠﺔ اﻟﻠﻲ ﻣﺎﻟﻘﯾﺗوش ﻟﯾﮭﺎ اﺟﺎﺑﺔ ؟‬ ‫]‪[Dated 20 October 2011‬‬ ‫‪Post A.4.12‬‬ ‫دﻛﺗورة ﻏﺎدة ﺷﺎھد ﻋﯾﺎن ﻋﻠﻰ ﺟراﺋم ﻗوات اﻷﻣن ﻓﻲ ﺣق اﻹﻧﺳﺎن اﻟﻣﺻري ﺑﻣﯾدان اﻟﺗﺣرﯾر وﻣﺣﻣد ﻣﺣﻣود‪..‬‬ ‫وﺣدﯾث ذو ﺻﻠﺔ ﺑﻣوﻗﻌﺔ اﻟﺟﻣل اﻟﺗﻲ ﺣﺿرﺗﮭﺎ أﯾﺿﺎ ً‬ ‫]‪[Dated 1 December 2011‬‬ ‫‪A.5 Invitations, opinion polls, surveys and questions to the‬‬ ‫‪collective members of the group‬‬ ‫‪Post A.5.1‬‬ ‫ﺗدﻋوﻛم ﺣرﻛﺔ ﺷﺑﺎب ‪ 6‬اﺑرﯾل ﻟوﻗﻔﺔ اﺣﺗﺟﺎﺟﯾﺔ ﻏدا اﻟﺳﺑت اﻟﺳﺎﻋﺔ ‪ 12‬ظﮭرا اﻣﺎم ﻣﺟﻠس اﻟﺷﻌب ﻟﻼﺣﺗﺟﺎج‬ ‫ﻋﻠﻰ ﻗﺎﻧون ﺧﺻﺧﺻﺔ اﻟﺗﺄﻣﯾن اﻟﺻﺣﻲ ﺗﺿﺎﻣﻧﺎ ﻣﻊ ﺣﻣﻠﺔ ﺿد ﺧﺻﺧﺻﺔ اﻟﺗﺄﻣﯾن اﻟﺻﺣﻲ اﻟﻣﺟﻣوﻋﺔ اﻻﻋﻼﻣﯾﺔ‬ ‫ﺣرﻛﺔ ﺷﺑﺎب ‪ 6‬اﺑرﯾل‬ ‫]‪[phone number removed‬‬ ‫]‪[undated‬‬ ‫‪- 191‬‬ ‫!‬ ‫‬‫‪Post A.5.2‬‬ ‫ﺗدﻋوﻛم ﺣرﻛﺔ ﺷﺑﺎب ‪ 6‬اﺑرﯾل ﻏدا ‪ 2‬ﻧوﻓﻣﺑر ﻟﺣﺿور اﻟﺟﻠﺳﺔ اﻟﺧﺗﺎﻣﯾﺔ ﻟﻣؤﺗﻣرھﺎ اﻟﻘﻠﺔ اﻟﻣﻧدﺳﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺣزب‬ ‫اﻟﺟﺑﮭﺔ اﻟدﯾﻣﻘراطﻲ ﺑﺎﻟﻣﮭﻧدﺳﯾن ‪ ....‬ﻟﻣزﯾد ﻣن اﻟﻣﻌﻠوﻣﺎت ‪www.6april.org‬‬ ‫]‪[undated‬‬ ‫‪Post A.5.3‬‬ ‫ﻣؤﺗﻣر اﻟﻘﻠﺔ اﻟﻣﻧدﺳﺔ ‪ -‬ﻓﻌﺎﻟﯾﺎت اﻟﯾوم اﻟﺛﺎﻧﻰ ‪ -‬ﻛﻠﻣﺎت اﻟﺷﺧﺻﯾﺎت اﻟﻌﺎﻣﺔ و اﻟﺳﯾﺎﺳﯾﺔ ﻟﻠﻣؤﺗﻣر‪:‬‬ ‫‪-‬‬ ‫اﻹﻋﻼﻣﯾﺔ‪ /‬ﺑﺛﯾﻧﺔ ﻛﺎﻣل ‪ -‬أ‪/‬ﻛﻣﺎل أﺑو ﻋﯾطﺔ ‪ -‬اﻟﻧﺎﺋب ﺣﻣدﯾن ﺻﺑﺎﺣﻰ ‪ -‬أ‪/‬ﻋﻼء اﻷﺳواﻧﻰ ]…[‬ ‫]‪[undated‬‬ ‫‪Post A.5.4‬‬ ‫ﻗرﯾﺑﺎ ً ﻣؤﺗﻣر اﻟﻘﻠﮫ اﻟﻣﻧدﺳﮫ‪ ..‬ﺗﺣت رﻋﺎﯾﺔ ﺷﺑﺎب ‪ 6‬اﺑرﯾل ‪ ..‬ھﻧﺎ اﻟﻘﺎھره و ﻟﯾس اﻟﺟﺎﺑون‬ ‫]‪[undated‬‬ ‫‪Post A.5.5‬‬ ‫ﻏداً أﻣﺎم ﻧﻘﺎﺑﺔ اﻟﺻﺣﻔﯾﯾن ﻓﻰ ﺗﻣﺎم اﻟﺳﺎدﺳﺔ و اﻟﻧﺻف‪..‬ﺑدﻋوى ﻣن ﺳﯾﺎدة اﻟﺳﻔﯾر إﺑراھﯾم ﯾﺳرى و ﺣرﻛﺔ ﺷﺑﺎب‬ ‫‪ 6‬إﺑرﯾل و ﺑﻣﺷﺎرﻛﺔ اﻟﻘوى اﻟوطﻧﯾﺔ‪ ..‬وﻗﻔﺔ إﺣﺗﺟﺎج‬ ‫]‪[undated‬‬ ‫‪Post A.5.6‬‬ ‫ھل ﺗواﻓق ﻋﻠﻰ ﺗﻧظﯾم ﻋﻣل إﺣﺗﺟﺎﺟﻲ ﯾوم ‪ 26‬ﻧوﻓﻣﺑر اﻟﻘﺎدم‪ ,‬إﻧﺗﺻﺎراً ﻟﻠﺿﺣﺎﯾﺎ اﻟﺗﻌذﯾب ﻓﻲ ﻣﺻر؟ ﺗواﻓق أن‬ ‫ﺗﻛون ﺻوت‪ ,‬ﻣن ﻻ‬ ‫ﺻوت ﻟﮫ؟‬ ‫]‪[Dated 21 November 2010‬‬ ‫‪Post A.5.7‬‬ ‫ﺷﺑﺎب‪ ..‬ﯾﺎرﯾت ﻛل اﻟﻠﻲ ﯾﺷوف اﻟﺳﺗﺎﺗوس ده ﯾدّﯾﻧﺎ رأﯾﮫ ﻷﻧﮫ ﻣﮭم ﻟﻠﻐﺎﯾﺔ‬ ‫ھل ﺗﻌﻠن رﻓﺿك ﻟﻧﺗﺎﺋﺞ إﻧﺗﺧﺎﺑﺎت ﻣﺟﻠس اﻟﺷﻌب؟ وأن ﻣﺟﻠس اﻟﺷﻌب اﻟﺟدﯾد ﻏﯾر ﺷرﻋﻲ وﻻ ﯾُﻣﺛﻠﻧﺎ؟ ﻧﻌم أم ﻷ‪..‬‬ ‫رﺟﺎء اﻟﺗﺻوﯾت ﺑﻛﺛﺎﻓﺔ اﻵن‬ ‫]‪[Dated 28 November 2010‬‬ ‫‪Post A.5.8‬‬ ‫طﯾب ﻣﻣﻛن ﻧر ّﻛز دﻗﺎﯾق‪ ..‬آراءﻧﺎ ھﻧﺎ ھﺎﺗﺑﻘﻰ ﺟزء ﻣن اﻟرأى اﻷﺧﯾر ﺑﺧﺻوص ﺑُﻛرة‪ ..‬ﻓﻲ إﺗﺟﺎھﯾن‪ :‬اﻷول‬ ‫اﻟﻧزول ﺑُﻛرة ﻟﻺﻋﻼن ﻋن دﻋﻣﻧﺎ ﻹﺧﺗﯾﺎر رﺋﯾس اﻟﺣﻛوﻣﺔ اﻟﺟدﯾد‪ ,‬وﺗﺄﻛﯾد ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣطﺎﻟﺑﻧﺎ ﺑﻣﺣﺎﺳﺑﺔ اﻟﻔﺎﺳدﯾن وﺣل‬ ‫ﺟﮭﺎز أﻣن اﻟدوﻟﺔ وأﻧﻧﺎ ﻣﺳﺗﻣرﯾن ﻓﻲ ﻣﺗﺎﺑﻌﺔ اﻟﻣوﻗف‪ ..‬واﻟرأي اﻟﺗﺎﻧﻲ إﻧﻧﺎ ﻧﻠﻐﻲ وﻣﺎﯾﺑﻘﺎش ﻓﻲ ﻧزول ﺑﻛرة‪ ..‬اﻟﻠﻲ‬ ‫ﻣواﻓق ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﻧزول ﯾﻌﻣل "ﻻﯾك" ﺑس واﻟﻠﻲ ﻣش ﻣواﻓق ﯾﻌﻣل "ﺗﻌﻠﯾق" ﻋﺷﺎن ﺑﺳﮭوﻟﺔ ﻧﻌرف إﺣﻧﺎ ﻋﺎﯾزﯾن إﯾﮫ‬ ‫]‪[Dated 3 March 2011‬‬ ‫‪Post A.5.9‬‬ ‫‪- 192‬‬ ‫!‬ ‫‬‫ﺑﻔرض أﻧﮫ ﺗم ﺗﻧظﯾم إﺣﺗﺟﺎﺟﺎت ﺷﻌﺑﯾﺔ واﺳﻌﺔ ﻓﻲ ‪ 6‬أﺑرﯾل ‪ 2011‬ﻟﺗﺻﺣﯾﺢ ﻣﺳﺎر اﻟﺛورة وﺗﺣﻘﯾق أھداﻓﮭﺎ‬ ‫وإﯾﺻﺎل رﺳﺎﻟﺔ ﻗوﯾﺔ ﻟﺣﻣﺎة ﺑﻘﺎﯾﺎ اﻟﻧظﺎم اﻟﺳﺎﺑق‪ ,‬ﻓﮭل ﺗﺷﺎرك ﻓﻲ أﺣداث ھذا اﻟﯾوم؟ اﻟرﺟﺎء اﻟﻣﺷﺎرﻛﺔ ﻓﻘط ﺑــ‬ ‫)ﻧﻌم( أو )ﻻ( ﻟﻺطﻼع‬ ‫]‪[Dated 26 March 2011‬‬ ‫‪Post A.5.10‬‬ ‫ﺑﻔرض أﻧﮫ ﺗم ﺗﻧظﯾم إﺣﺗﺟﺎﺟﺎت ﺷﻌﺑﯾﺔ واﺳﻌﺔ ﻓﻲ ‪ 6‬أﺑرﯾل ‪ 2011‬ﻟﺗﺻﺣﯾﺢ ﻣﺳﺎر اﻟﺛورة وﺗﺣﻘﯾق أھداﻓﮭﺎ‬ ‫وإﯾﺻﺎل رﺳﺎﻟﺔ ﻗوﯾﺔ ﻟﺣﻣﺎة ﺑﻘﺎﯾﺎ اﻟﻧظﺎم اﻟﺳﺎﺑق‪ ,‬ﻓﮭل ﺗﺷﺎرك ﻓﻲ أﺣداث ھذا اﻟﯾوم؟ اﻟرﺟﺎء اﻟﻣﺷﺎرﻛﺔ ﻓﻘط ﺑــ‬ ‫)ﻧﻌم( أو )ﻻ( ﻟﻺطﻼع — ‪.with Omima Emad‬‬ ‫]‪[Dated 26 March 2011‬‬ ‫‪Post A.5.11‬‬ ‫ﻣﯾن ھﯾﺿُم ﻋﻠﯾﻧﺎ ﻓﻰ اﻟﻣﯾدان؟‬ ‫ﻛل اﻟﻠﻰ ﺷﺎﯾف إن اﻟﻣﺷوار ﻟﺳﮫ طوﯾل‪ ..‬و اﻟﺑﻧﺎء ﻟﺳﮫ ﺑﯾﺑدأ‬ ‫و ﻻزم ‪-‬ﻣن اﻵﺧر‪ -‬ﻧﺑدأ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻧﺿﺎﻓﺔ‬ ‫ﻟﺳﮫ اﻟﺛﻼﺛﻰ اﻟﻣرح ﺑره و ﺑﯾﻠﻔوا ﺗراك اﻟﻧواد‬ ‫ﺳرور‪/‬ﺷرﯾف‪/‬ﻋزﻣﻰ‬ ‫ﻟﺳﮫ اﻟﺣزب اﻟوطﻧﻰ ﻣﺎﺗﺣﻠّش‬ ‫ﻟﺳﮫ ﻓﻰ ﻣﻌﺗﻘﻠﯾن ﺳﯾﺎﺳﯾﯾن‬ ‫اﻟﺷﻌب ﺛﺎر ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﺧوف‪,‬ﻓﻼ ﺧوف ﺑﻌد اﻟﯾوم‬ ‫ﻻ ﻗداﺳﺔ ﻟﺣﺎﻛم أﯾﺎ ً ﻛﺎن إذا ﻓﻛر )ﻣﺟرد ﺗﻔﻛﯾر( ﻓﻰ اﻹﻟﺗﻔﺎف ﻋﻠﻰ ﺣﻘوق و ﻣطﺎﻟب اﻟﺷﻌب‬ ‫ﻓﺎﻛر اﻟﺛورة ﺧﻠﺻت؟! اﻟﺛورة ﻟﺳﮫ ﺑﺗﺑدأ‪ ..‬ﺛورة اﻟﺑﻧﺎء‬ ‫ﻣﯾن ھﯾﺿُم ﻋﻠﯾﻧﺎ ﻓﻰ اﻟﻣﯾدان؟‬ ‫]ﻣﻠﯾوﻧﯾﺔ اﻧﻘﺎذ اﻟﺛورة ‪ ,‬اﻟﺟﻣﻌﺔ ‪[Post dated 26 March 2011; Event dated/titled: 1/4/2011‬‬ ‫‪Post A.5.12‬‬ ‫ﻓﻲ ﺿوء ﺣرﻛﺔ اﻟﻣﺣﺎﻓظﯾن اﻷﺧﯾرة‪ ،‬ﻣﺎ ھو ﺗﻘﯾﯾﻣك ﻷداء رﺋﯾس اﻟوزراء دﻛﺗور ﻋﺻﺎم ﺷرف ﻣﻧذ ﺗوﻟﯾﮫ‬ ‫اﻟﻣﺳؤوﻟﯾﺔ وﺣﺗﻰ اﻟﻠﺣظﺔ؟‬ ‫ﻟﻸﺳف وﺣش‬ ‫‪1,254 votes‬‬ ‫ﻋظﯾﻣﺔ ﯾﺎ ﻣﺻر ﯾﺎ ارض اﻟﻠواء‬ ‫‪467 votes‬‬ ‫ﻣﺗوﺳط‬ ‫‪411 votes‬‬ ‫‪- 193‬‬ ‫!‬ ‫‬‫ﯾرﯾد اﻟﺧﯾر ﻟﻛﻧﮫ ﻣﻐﻠوب ﻋﻠﻰ أﻣره‬ ‫‪119 votes‬‬ ‫ﻻ ﯾﺳﺗﺣق ﻟﻘب رﺋﯾس ﺣﻛوﻣﺔ ﺛورة‬ ‫‪83 votes‬‬ ‫ﺟﯾد‬ ‫‪72 votes‬‬ ‫ﻣش ﺣﻛوﻣﮫ ﺛوره‬ ‫‪55 votes‬‬ ‫زﻓت وطﯾن ﻋﻠﻰ دﻣﺎﻏﺔ ودﻣﺎغ اﻟﻠﻰ ﺧﻠﻔﺗﺔ‬ ‫‪50 votes‬‬ ‫ﺳﯾﺊ ﺟدا‬ ‫‪37 votes‬‬ ‫ﺳﻠم و ﺗﻌﺑﺎن‬ ‫‪18 votes‬‬ ‫]‪[Dated 4 August 2011‬‬ ‫‪Post A.5.13‬‬ ‫اﯾﮫ اﻛﺗر ھﺗﺎف ﺑﻌد اﻟﺛورة ﺑـ ﺗردده ﻓﻲ ﻣﻠﯾوﻧﯾﺔ او ﻣﺳﯾرة او ﻣظﺎھرة؟‬ ‫)‪ (+2k‬ﯾﺳﻘط ﯾﺳﻘط ﺣﻛم اﻟﻌﺳﻛر‬ ‫)‪Masra7ia Masra7ia wel 3esabah hai hia (234 people‬‬ ‫ﯾﺎ اھﺎﻟﯾﻧﺎ اﻧﺿﻣو ﻟﯾﻧﺎ‬ ‫)‪ (+84‬اﻟﺷﻌب واﻟﺟﯾش اﯾد واﺣدة‬ ‫)‪ (+65‬ﯾﺎ ﻧﺟﯾب ﺣﻘﮭم ﯾﺎ ﻧﻣوت زﯾﮭم‬ ‫]…[‬ ‫]‪[Dated 21 October 2011‬‬ ‫‪Post A.5.14‬‬ ‫ﻣﺎ رأﯾك ﻓﻰ اﻹﻋﻼن اﻟدﺳﺗوري اﻟذي أﺻدره اﻟﻣﺟﻠس اﻟﻌﺳﻛري اﻟﯾوم ‪ 17‬ﯾوﻧﯾو ‪2012‬؟‬ ‫]‪[Dated 17 June 2012‬‬ ‫‪Post A.5.15‬‬ ‫ھل ﺗﺗﻣﻧﻰ أن ﯾﺻﺑﺢ "اﻟﺑوب" أول رﺋﯾس ﺣﻛوﻣﺔ ﻟﻣﺻر ﻣﺎ ﺑﻌد ‪ 25‬ﯾﻧﺎﯾر؟ وﻣﺎذا ﻟو ﺣدث ھذا‪ ،‬ﻛﯾف ﺳﯾﻛون‬ ‫ﺷﻌورك ﺣﯾﺎل اﻷﻣر؟‬ ‫‪- 194‬‬ ‫!‬ ‫‬‫]‪[Dated 23 June 2012‬‬ ‫‪Post A.5.16‬‬ ‫ﻓﻲ رأﯾك ﻣﺎھﻲ اﻻوﻟوﯾﺔ اﻟﺗﻲ ﯾﺟب ان ﺗﺣﺗل اﻟرﻗم ‪ 1‬ﻋﻠﻲ اﺟﻧدة اﻟرﺋﯾس؟‬ ‫]‪[Dated 26 June 2012‬‬ ‫‪Post A.5.17‬‬ ‫ﺗﻘﯾﯾﻣﻲ ﻵداء اﻟرﺋﯾس ﻣﺣﻣد ﻣرﺳﻲ ﺣﺗﻰ اﻵن ھو‬ ‫]‪[Dated 27 July 2012‬‬ ‫‪Post A.5.18‬‬ ‫اﻻﺻرار ﻋﻠﻰ اﻗﺎﻣﺔ ﻣﺑﺎراة اﻟﺳوﺑر رﻏم اﻋﺗراﺿﺎت اﻟﻛﺛﯾرﯾن وﻋﻠﻰ رأﺳﮭم ﻣﺟﻣوﻋﺎت اﻻﻟﺗراس ‪ ..‬ﺳﺑﺑﮫ‬ ‫]‪[Dated 9 September 2012‬‬ ‫‪A.6 Reports and quotes‬‬ ‫‪Post A.6.1‬‬ ‫ﻧﺣن ﻟن ﻧﻧﮭزم أﺑداً‪ ..‬إﻣﺎ ﻧﻧﺗﺻر‪ ,‬أو ﻧﻣوت‬ ‫ﻋﻣر اﻟﻣﺧﺗﺎر‬ ‫]‪[Dated December 2010‬‬ ‫‪Post A.6.2‬‬ ‫اﻵن ﺳﯾﺎرة ﻛﺎدﯾﻼك ﺳﻛﻠﯾد ﻓور ﺑﺎى ﻓور ﺳوداء ﻧﻣرة‪ :‬ل ج أ ‪ 135‬ﻓوق ﻛوﺑري أﻛﺗوﺑر أﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﯾدان ﻋﺑداﻟﻣﻧﻌم‬ ‫رﯾﺎض ﺗﻘوم ﺑﺗوزﯾﻊ ﻣﺑﺎﻟﻎ ﻣﺎﻟﯾﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﺑﻠطﺟﯾﺔ اﻟﻣﺗﺄھﺑﯾن ﻹﻗﺗﺣﺎم ﻣﯾدان اﻟﺗﺣرﯾر ﻓﺟر اﻟﯾوم‪ ..‬رﺟﺎء اﻟﻧﺷر ﻓﻲ‬ ‫ﻛل ﻣﻛﺎن‬ ‫]‪[Dated 3 February 2011‬‬ ‫‪Post A.6.3‬‬ ‫ﺳﻣﯾر رﺿوان "وزﯾـــــــــــــــر اﻟﺷﻌــــــــــــب" ﯾﻘول ‪ :‬ﻣﺻر ﻟم ﺗﻌﺟز ﺣﺗﻰ ﺗﻘﺑل اﺳﺗﺛﻣﺎرً ا إﺳراﺋﯾﻠﯾًﺎ ﻋﻠﻰ‬ ‫أرﺿﮭﺎ ﻣﮭﻣﺎ ﻛﺎن اﻟﻌﺎﺋد اﻻﻗﺗﺻﺎدى | ﺗﺣﯾﺎ اﻟﺛورة‬ ‫]‪[Dated 16 April 2011‬‬ ‫‪Post A.6.4‬‬ ‫ﺟﻼل ﻋﺎﻣر | ﻣﺷﻛﻠﺔ اﻟﻣﺻرﯾﯾن اﻟﻛﺑرى‪ ،‬أﻧﮭم ﯾﻌﯾﺷون ﻓﻰ ﻣﻛﺎن واﺣد‪ ..‬ﻟﻛﻧﮭم‪ ،‬ﻻ ﯾﻌﯾﺷون ﻓﻰ زﻣﺎن واﺣد‬ ‫]‪[Dated 1 December 2011‬‬ ‫‪A.7 Appeals‬‬ ‫‪Post A.7.1‬‬ ‫‪- 195‬‬ ‫!‬ ‫‬‫ﻛل واﺣد ﻧﺎزل ﯾﺗظﺎھر ﻋﺷﺎن ﻣﺻر ‪ 25‬ﯾﻧﺎﯾر ھو ﻣواطن ﻣﺳﺎﻟم ﻧﺎزل ﯾطﺎﻟب ﺑﺣﻘﮫ وﺣق أھل ﺑﻠده ﻣش أﻛﺗر‪,‬‬ ‫أى إﻋﺗداء ﻋﻠﯾﻧﺎ ﻣرﻓوض‪ ,‬وﺣﻣﯾﺎﺗﻧﺎ ﻷﻧﻔﺳﻧﺎ وﻟزﻣﻼءﻧﺎ ﻣن اﻟﻣﺷﺎرﻛﯾن ﺟﻣﯾﻌﺎ ً ﺣق ﻟﯾﻧﺎ‪ ..‬ﯾﻣﻛن أول ﻣرة ﺗﺣﺻل‬ ‫ﻓﻲ ﻣﺻر ﻣش ﻋﺎرف‪ ,‬ﻟﻛن ھﺎﯾﺑﻘﻰ ﻓﻲ دروع ﻟﺣﻣﺎﯾﺔ اﻟﻣﺗظﺎھرﯾن ﺣﺎل ﻗﺎﻣت اﻟﺷرطﺔ ﺑﺎﻹﻋﺗداء ﺑﺎﻟﺿرب‬ ‫ﻋﻠﯾﻧﺎ‪ ..‬اﻹﻋﺗداء ﻣﻧﮭم ﻟن ﻧرده ﺑﺈﻋﺗداء ﯾﺎ رﯾت ﻣﺎﻧﻧﺳﺎش‬ ‫]‪[Dated 23 January 2011‬‬ ‫‪Post A.7.2‬‬ ‫ﺑﺎق ﻣن اﻟزﻣن ﻣﺎ ﯾﻘرب ﻣن اﻟﺛﻼث ﺳﺎﻋﺎت ﻋﻠﻲ ]‪ [sic‬ﻏﻠق ﺑﺎب اﻻﻗﺗراع ﻓﻲ اول اﻧﺗﺧﺎﺑﺎت رﺋﺎﺳﯾﺔ ﻓﻲ ﻣﺻر‬ ‫ﺑﻌد اﻟﺛورة ‪ ..‬ﺑﺻرف اﻟﻧظر ﻋن اي ﺧﻠط ﻟﻼوراق او ﻋك ﺷﺎب اﻟﻔﺗرة اﻻﻧﺗﻘﺎﻟﯾﺔ ﻓﯾﻣﺎ ﯾﺧص اﺟراءات اﻟﺗﺣول‬ ‫اﻟدﯾﻣﻘراطﻲ ‪ ..‬ﻟﻛن ﻛﻠﻧﺎ ﻻزم ﻧﻛون اﯾﺟﺎﺑﯾﯾن ﻓﻲ اﺧﺗﯾﺎر اول رﺋﯾس ﻟﻣﺻر ﺑﻌد اﻟﺛورة ‪ ..‬ﻣﻣﻛن ﯾﻛون ﻟﺳﺔ‬ ‫ﻣﺻوﺗش ﻋﺷﺎن ﻣش ﻻﻗﻲ ﻣرﺷﺣك اﻟﻣﺛﺎﻟﻲ ﻓﻲ اﺳﻣﺎء اﻟﻣرﺷﺣﯾن وﯾﻣﻛن ﻟﺳﺔ ﻣﺻوﺗش ﻋﺷﺎن ﺧﺎﯾف ان ﻗرارك‬ ‫ﻣش ھﺎﯾﺣﺗرم زي ﻣﺎ اﻟﻌﺳﻛر ﻣﺎ اﺣﺗرﻣش ﻗرارات اﻟﺷﻌب ﻓﻲ اﻻﺳﺗﻔﺗﺎء‪ .‬ﻣن ﻓﺿﻠك ﻓﻛر اﻻن واﺣﺳﺑﮭﺎ ﺻﺢ ‪..‬‬ ‫اﻟﻣﻼﯾﯾن اﻟﻠﻲ ﻧزﻟت ﻣن اﻣﺑﺎرح ﻧزﻟت ﻋﺷﺎن ﺗﺧﺗﺎر ﻟﯾﻧﺎ ﻛﻠﻧﺎ ‪ ..‬ﻟﯾﮫ ﻣﺎﺗﺷﺎرﻛش ﻓﻲ اﺧﺗﯾﺎر اﻟرﺋﯾس!؟ اھداف‬ ‫اﻟﺛورة ﻓﻲ ﺣﺎﺟﺔ اﻟﻲ ]‪ [sic‬ﺻوﺗك ‪ ..‬ﻟو ﻛﻧت ﺻوت اﺗﺻل ﺑﻛل اﻟﻠﻲ ﺗﻌرﻓﮫ ﻟﺳﺔ ﻣﺻوﺗش وﺧﻠﯾﮫ ﯾﻧزل ﯾدﻋم‬ ‫اھداف اﻟﺛورة ‪ ..‬اﻣﺎ ﻟو ﻛﻧت اﻧت ﻧﻔﺳك ﻟﺳﺔ ﻣﺎﺧﺗرﺗش‪ ،‬ﯾﺑﻘﻰ ﺣﻛم ﻋﻘﻠك وﺿﻣﯾرك واﻧزل ﻣن ﺑﯾﺗك‪.‬‬ ‫]‪[Dated May 2012‬‬ ‫‪A.8 Slogans‬‬ ‫‪Post A.8.1‬‬ ‫ﻣﺻر اﻷم دي ھم ﻣﺻر‪ ..‬اﺳﻣﻌﮭﺎ ﺑﺗدﻋﻲ ﻟﻠﺷﺑﺎب ازاى واﻟﺷﺑﺎب ازاى وھم ﻣﺎﯾﻌرﻓوھﺎش ﯾﺑوﺳوا ﻋﻠﻰ راﺳﮭﺎ‬ ‫واﯾدﯾﮭﺎ‬ ‫ﻣﺻر ﻣﺣﺗﺎﺟﻛم ﯾﺎ وﻻدي‪ ..‬ﻣﺻر ﻣﺣﺗﺎﺟﺎﻛم ﯾﺎ ﺣﺑﺎﯾﺑﻲ‪ ..‬ﷲ ﻣﻌﺎﻛم ﯾﺎ وﻻدي‬ ‫]‪[Dated 26 January 2011‬‬ ‫‪Post A.8.2‬‬ ‫ﺑُص‪ ..‬ﺷوف‪ ..‬اﻟﺛورة ﺑﺗﻌﻣل إﯾﮫ؟‬ ‫]‪[Dated 28 April 2011‬‬ ‫ﻋﺎﺷت اﻟﺛورة اﻟﻣﺻرﯾﺔ‪ ..‬ﻋﺎﺷت اﻟوﺣدة اﻟﻔﻠﺳطﯾﻧﯾﺔ‪ ..‬ﻋﺎﺷت اﻷﻣﺔ اﻟﻌرﺑﯾﺔ‬ ‫]‪[Dated 28 April 2011‬‬ ‫‪Post A.8.3‬‬ ‫ﺑﺎﻟطﺑﻊ ﻟن ﻧﺳﺗﺳﻠم‪ ..‬ﻓﻧﺣن ﻟﺳﻧﺎ ﻣﺟرد ﻣﻌﺎرﺿون‪ ,‬و ﻟﻛﻧﻧﺎ ﻣﻘﺎوﻣون‪ ..‬و ﺷﺗﺎن ﺑﯾن اﻟﻣﻌﺎرﺿﮫ و اﻟﻣﻘﺎوﻣﮫ‬ ‫]‪[Dated April 2012‬‬ ‫‪Post A.8.4‬‬ ‫ﺷﺗﺎن ﺑﯾن اﻟﻣﻘﺎوﻣﮫ و اﻟﻣﻌﺎرﺿﮫ ‪ ..‬ﺷﺑﺎب ‪ 6‬اﺑرﯾل ﻗﺎدﻣون و ﺻﺎﻣدون‬ ‫]‪[Dated April 2012‬‬ ‫‪- 196‬‬ ‫!‬ ‫‬‫‪Post A.8.5‬‬ ‫ﺷﺑﺎب ‪ 6‬إﺑرﯾل‪ ..‬ﺑﺎﻗون‪ ..‬ﻗﺎدﻣون‪ ..‬وﻟو ﻛره اﻟﻛﺎرھون‬ ‫]‪[Dated April 2012‬‬ ‫‪Post A.8.6‬‬ ‫‪Civil Disobedience is Patriotic.‬‬ ‫]‪[Dated April 2012‬‬ ‫‪A.9 Cartoons, humour and satire‬‬ ‫‪Post A.9.1‬‬ ‫]‪[Dated 20 August 2008‬‬ ‫‪Post A.9.2‬‬ ‫ﺷﺑﺎب‪ ..‬ﻓﻲ ﻓﻛرة ﻣﺎﻛﺗﻣﻠﺗش‪ ,‬ﻋﺎﯾزﯾن ﻧﻔ ّﻛر ﻓﯾﮭﺎ‪ ,‬ﻛﻠﻧﺎ ﺳوا‪ ,‬وﻟو وﺻﻠﻧﺎ ﻟﺷﻛل أو ﺻﯾﻐﺔ ﻛوﯾﺳﺔ ﻟﮭﺎ‪ 6 ,‬أﺑرﯾل‬ ‫ﻣﻣﻛن ﺗﻧﻔذھﺎ‪ ,‬وﯾﻣﻛن ﻛﻣﺎن ﯾﺑﻘﻰ ﻓﻲ ﺗﻐطﯾﺔ إﻋﻼﻣﯾﺔ ﻟﮭﺎ! ﻋﺎﯾزﯾن ﻧﻌﻣل إﺳﺗﻔﺗﺎء ﻋن اﺳوأ اﻟﺷﺧﺻﯾﺎت ﻓﻲ‬ ‫اﻟﺷﺎرع اﻟﻣﺻري‪ ,‬واﻟﺟواﺋز ﺗﺑﻘﻰ ﺗﻌﺑﯾرﯾﺔ‪ ..‬ﯾﻌﻧﻲ ﻣﺛﻼً ﺟﺎﺋزة اﻟﺗزوﯾر اﻟﺗﻌﺑﯾرﯾﺔ وﺣﺻل ﻋﻠﯾﮭﺎ أﺣﻣد ﻋز وھﻛذا‪,‬‬ ‫إﯾﮫ رأﯾﻛم ﻓﻲ اﻟﻔﻛرة وﻟو ﻋﻣﻠﻧﺎ اﻟﻣﺳﺎﺑﻘﺔ ﺗﺳﻣﯾﮭﺎ إﯾﮫ؟‬ ‫]‪[Dated 12 December 2010‬‬ ‫‪Post A.9.3‬‬ ‫ﯾﺎ رﯾت اﻟرﯾّس ﻛﺎن ﺿرﺑﻧﺎ إﺣﻧﺎ اﻟﺿرﺑﺔ اﻟﺟوﯾﺔ‪ ,‬وﺣﻛم إﺳراﺋﯾل ‪ 30‬ﺳﻧﺔ‬ ‫اﻟﻐﺎز ﻹﺳراﺋﯾل‪ ,‬طﯾّﺎرات إطﻔﺎء ﺣراﯾق ﻹﺳراﺋﯾل‪ ,‬ﺳور ﻋﺎزل ﻹﺳراﺋﯾل‬ ‫ﺗﺣﯾﺔ ﻟﻠرﺋﯾس ووﻟده‪ ,‬ﻣُﻔﺟّ را ﺛورة اﻟﺗدﻋﯾم واﻟﺗطوﯾر واﻟﺣﻣﺎﯾﺔ ﻹﺳراﺋﯾل اﻹرھﺎﺑﯾﺔ‬ ‫اﻟﻣوﻣﯾــــــــــــﺎء‬ ‫]‪[Dated 13 December 2010‬‬ ‫‪Post A.9.4‬‬ ‫‪- 197‬‬ ‫!‬ ‫‬‫ﺷﺑﺎب إﺣﻧﺎ إﺗﻌودﻧﺎ ھﻧﺎ ﻛل ﺧطوة ﺟدﯾدة ﻧﺎﺧدھﺎ ﺳوا‪ ..‬ﻣن ﻏﺎﻟﺑﯾﺔ ﺗﻌﻠﯾﻘﺎﺗﻛم ﺑﺧﺻوص اﻹﺳﺗﻔﺗﺎء ﻋﻠﻰ اﺳوأ‬ ‫ﺷﺧﺻﯾﺎت اﻷﻣﺔ‪ ,‬ﻛﻠﮫ ﺗﻘرﯾﺑﺎ ً واﻓق إﻧﻧﺎ ﻧﻌﻣﻠﮭﺎ‪ ..‬دﻟوﻗﺗﻲ ﻋﺎﯾزﯾن إﺳم ﺑس ﻟﻠﻣﺳﺎﺑﻘﺔ‪ ,‬أﻓﺿل ﻋﻧوان أو إﺳم‪,‬‬ ‫ھﺎﻧﺧﺗﺎره ﺳوا‪ ..‬ھو اﻟﻠﻲ ھﺎﻧﻌﻣل اﻟﻣﺳﺎﺑﻘﺔ ﺑﯾﮫ‬ ‫]‪[Dated 14 December 2010‬‬ ‫‪Post A.9.5‬‬ ‫‪ - 1‬ﻣﺳﺎﺑﻘﺔ ‪ 6‬أﺑرﯾل اﻟﺗﻌﺑﯾرﯾﺔ ‪ -‬ﻓﺳﺎد أوورد‬ ‫‪ - 2‬ﻣﺳﺎﺑﻘﺔ ‪ 6‬أﺑرﯾل اﻟﺗﻌﺑﯾرﯾﺔ ‪ -‬ﺗزوﯾر أوورد‬ ‫‪ - 3‬ﻣﺳﺎﺑﻘﺔ ‪ 6‬أﺑرﯾل اﻟﺗﻌﺑﯾرﯾﺔ ‪ -‬ﻣن اﻷراﺿﻲ اﻟﻣﺻرﯾﺔ اﻟﻣﺣﺗﻠﺔ‬ ‫ﺷﺑﺎب رﺟﺎء وﺿﻊ رﻗم اﻹﺳم اﻟﻠﻲ إﻧﺗوا ﺷﺎﯾﻔﯾﻧﮫ ﻣﻧﺎﺳب ﻟﻠﻣﺳﺎﺑﻘﺔ ف اﻟﺗﻌﻠﯾﻘﺎت‪ ..‬اﻟرﻗم ﻓﻘط‬ ‫]‪[Dated 19 December 2010‬‬ ‫‪Post A.9.6‬‬ ‫]‪[Dated 22 February 2013‬‬ ‫‪- 198‬‬ ‫!‬ ‫‬‫‪Post A.9.7‬‬ ‫]‪[Dated 9 April 2014‬‬ ‫‪A.10 Ideas, thoughts and feelings‬‬ ‫‪Post A.10.1‬‬ ‫ﺳﯾدي اﻟرﺋﯾس ‪ ..‬ﻓﻲ ﻋﯾد ﻣﯾﻼدك اﻟﻛﺎم وﺗﻣﺎﻧﯾن ‪ ..‬ﻛل ﺳﻧﺔ وأﻧت طﯾب ‪ ..‬واﺣﻧﺎ ﻣش طﯾﺑﯾن ‪ ..‬ﻛل ﺳﻧﺔ وأﻧت‬ ‫ﺣﺎﻛم ‪ ..‬واﺣﻧﺎ ﻣﺣﻛوﻣﯾن ‪ ..‬واﺣﻧﺎ ﻣظﻠوﻣﯾن ‪ ..‬واﺣﻧﺎ ﻣﺗﮭﺎﻧﯾن ‪ ..‬وﯾﺎ ﺗرى ﯾﺎ ﺣﺑﯾب اﻟﻣﻼﯾﯾن ‪ ..‬ﻓﺎﻛرﻧﺎ وﻻ اﺣﻧﺎ‬ ‫ﺧﻼص ﻣﻧﺳﯾﯾن ‪ ..‬ﻓﺎﻛر اﻟﻣﻌﺗﻘﻠﯾن ‪ ..‬ﻓﺎﻛر اﻟﺟﻌﺎﻧﯾن ‪ ..‬ﻓﺎﻛر اﻟﻣﺷردﯾن ‪ ..‬ﻓﺎﻛر اﻟﻠﻲ ‪ ..‬ﻣﺎﺗو ﻣﺣروﻗﯾن ‪ ..‬ﻓﺎﻛر‬ ‫اﻟﻐرﻗﺎﻧﯾن ﷲ ﯾﻛون ﻓﻲ ﻋوﻧك ‪ -‬ھﺎﺗﻔﺗﻛر ﻣﯾن وﻻ ﻣﯾن‬ ‫اﺳﺄﻟﯾﻧﻲ ﯾﺎ ﺣﺑﯾﺑﺗﻲ ع اﻟﻠﻲ داﯾر ﻓﻲ اﻟﺑﻼد‪ ,‬اﻟﻠﻲ ﻓﯾﮭﺎ ﺻﺎدروا ﺣﻠﻣﻲ وﺑﺎﻋوا ﺻوﺗﻲ ﻓﻰ اﻟﻣزاد‬ ‫]‪[Dated 4 May 2010‬‬ ‫‪- 199‬‬ ‫!‬ ‫‬‫‪Post A.10.2‬‬ ‫دي اﻷﻓﻛﺎر اﻟﻠﻲ زرﻋﮭﺎ اﻟﺣزب اﻟوطﻧﻲ اﻟﻔﺎﺳد ﻓﻲ اﻟﻧﺎس اﻟﺑﺳطﺎء واﻟﻐﻼﺑﺔ‪ ..‬إﺑﻌد ﻋن اﻟﺳﯾﺎﺳﺔ‪ ,‬وإﻣﺷﻲ ﺟﻧب‬ ‫اﻟﺣﯾط‪ ,‬وﻋﺎﯾزﯾن ﻧﺎﻛل ﻋﯾش‪ ..‬وآﻻف اﻟﺟﻣل اﻟﻣوروﺛﺔ اﻟﻠﻲ ﻋﻣوا ﺑﯾﮭﺎ اﻟﻧﺎس وﺿﻠﻠوھم وﺧوّ ﻓوھم‪ ..‬ﻛل واﺣد‬ ‫ﻣن ﺣﻘﮫ ﯾﻌﯾش ﺑﺣرﯾﺔ وﻛراﻣﮫ ﻓﻲ ﺑﻠده‬ ‫]‪[Dated December 2010‬‬ ‫‪Post A.10.3‬‬ ‫ﻓﻲ اﻟﺳﻧﺔ اﻟﻠﻲ روﺣﻧﺎ ﻧﺷﺗﻐل ﻣطﺎﻓﻲ ﻹﺳراﺋﯾل‪ ,‬اﻷرﺟﻧﺗﯾن وﻗﺑﻠﮭﺎ اﻟﺑرازﯾل إﻋﺗرﻓت ﺑﺎﻟدوﻟﺔ اﻟﻔﻠﺳطﯾﻧﯾﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ‬ ‫ﺣدود ‪67‬‬ ‫]‪[Dated December 6, 2010‬‬ ‫‪Post A.10.4‬‬ ‫ﺣﻠم‬ ‫اﻟﻧﺎس ﺗﺧرج اﻟﺷوارع ﺑﺎﻟﻣﻼﯾﯾن ﺗﺄﯾﯾداً ﻟﻠرﺋﯾس اﻟﺟدﯾد‪ ,‬إﻋﺎدة ھﯾﻛﻠﺔ وﻣراﻗﺑﺔ ﻋﻣل اﻟﺷرطﺔ اﻟﻣﺻرﯾﺔ‪ ,‬ﻋودة‬ ‫أﻟوف اﻟﻌﻠﻣﺎء ﻣن أﺑﻧﺎء ﻣﺻر ب اﻟﺧﺎرج‪ ,‬ﺗطﺑﯾق ﻧظﺎم ﺟدﯾد ﻟﻠﺗﻌﻠﯾم وإﻟﻐﺎء ﻧظﺎم اﻟﺗﻧﺳﯾق‪ ,‬اﻟﺟﺎﻣﻌﺎت اﻟﻣﺻرﯾﺔ‬ ‫ﺗﺳﺗﻘﺑل آﻻف اﻟﺧرﯾﺟﯾن اﻟﺳﺎﺑﻘﯾن وﺗﻘدم ﻟﮭم ﺧدﻣﺔ إﻋﺎدة ﺗﺄھﯾل ﺑﻣﻘﺎﺑل رﻣزي‪ ,‬ﻣﺟﻠس اﻟﺷﻌب ﯾﻌﻠن ﻋزﻣﮫ إﺳﻘﺎط‬ ‫اﻟﺣﻛوﻣﺔ ﺣﺎل ﻓﺷﻠﮭﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺗﺣﻘﯾق إﻟﺗزاﻣﺎﺗﮭﺎ‬ ‫]‪[Dated 13 December 2010‬‬ ‫‪Post A.10.5‬‬ ‫ﺳﻧﺑﻘﻰ ﻣﺎ ﺑﻘﻰ اﻹﺣﺗﻼل‪ ..‬ﻻ ﻣﻌﺎرﺿﺔ‪ ,‬ﻻ إﺣﺗﺟﺎج‪ ,‬ﺑل ﻣُﻘﺎوﻣﺔ‪ ..‬اﻟﺷﺑﺎب ھم ﺣرﻛﺔ اﻟﻣﻘﺎوﻣﺔ اﻟﻣﺻرﯾﺔ‬ ‫]‪[Dated December 9, 2010‬‬ ‫‪Post A.10.6‬‬ ‫ﻣن اﻟﻘﺎھرة إﻟﻲ ﺗوﻧس‪ ،‬ﺷﺑﺎب واﺣد ﻋﻠﻲ ﻗﻠب واﺣد ﺑﯾﺣﻠم ﺑﺎﻟﺧﺑز وﺑﺎﻟﺣرﯾﺔ‪ ،‬ﺑﯾﺣﻠم ﺑﺑﻠده ﺗﻛون ﻟﯾﮫ ھوه‪ ،‬ﻣن‬ ‫اﻟﻘﺎھرة إﻟﻲ ﺗوﻧس أﻟف ﺗﺣﯾﺔ‪ ،‬ﻓﯾروس اﻟﺣرﯾﺔ واﻟﺗﻐﯾﯾر ﺑدأ ﯾﻧﺗﺷر‬ ‫]‪[Dated 28 December 2010‬‬ ‫‪Post A.10.7‬‬ ‫ﻟﺳﮫ ﻓﯾﻛﻲ اﻟﺧﯾر ﯾﺎ ﻣﺻر‬ ‫اﻟﻧظﺎم اﻟﻔﺎﺳد اﻟﻔﺎﺷل أھﻣل ﺑطل ﻗوﻣﻲ داﻓﻊ ﻋن اﻟوطن ده ﺑﺣﯾﺎﺗﮫ‬ ‫ﻟﻛن اﻟﻧﺎس واﻟﺷﺑﺎب ﻣش ھﺎﯾﺳﯾﺑوه‪ ..‬وﻻزم ھﺎﻧﻛرّ ﻣﮫ ﺑﻛل ﺷﻛل ﻣﻣﻛن‬ ‫]‪[Dated 29 December 2010‬‬ ‫‪Post A.10.8‬‬ ‫طﯾب ﻣﻣﻛن ﻧر ّﻛز دﻗﺎﯾق‪ ..‬آراءﻧﺎ ھﻧﺎ ھﺎﺗﺑﻘﻰ ﺟزء ﻣن اﻟرأى اﻷﺧﯾر ﺑﺧﺻوص ﺑُﻛرة‪ ..‬ﻓﻲ إﺗﺟﺎھﯾن‪ :‬اﻷول‬ ‫اﻟﻧزول ﺑُﻛرة ﻟﻺﻋﻼن ﻋن دﻋﻣﻧﺎ ﻹﺧﺗﯾﺎر رﺋﯾس اﻟﺣﻛوﻣﺔ اﻟﺟدﯾد‪ ,‬وﺗﺄﻛﯾد ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣطﺎﻟﺑﻧﺎ ﺑﻣﺣﺎﺳﺑﺔ اﻟﻔﺎﺳدﯾن وﺣل‬ ‫ﺟﮭﺎز أﻣن اﻟدوﻟﺔ وأﻧﻧﺎ ﻣﺳﺗﻣرﯾن ﻓﻲ ﻣﺗﺎﺑﻌﺔ اﻟﻣوﻗف‪ ..‬واﻟرأي اﻟﺗﺎﻧﻲ إﻧﻧﺎ ﻧﻠﻐﻲ وﻣﺎﯾﺑﻘﺎش ﻓﻲ ﻧزول ﺑﻛرة‪ ..‬اﻟﻠﻲ‬ ‫ﻣواﻓق ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟﻧزول ﯾﻌﻣل "ﻻﯾك" ﺑس واﻟﻠﻲ ﻣش ﻣواﻓق ﯾﻌﻣل "ﺗﻌﻠﯾق" ﻋﺷﺎن ﺑﺳﮭوﻟﺔ ﻧﻌرف إﺣﻧﺎ ﻋﺎﯾزﯾن إﯾﮫ‬ ‫]‪[March 3 2011‬‬ ‫‪- 200‬‬ ‫!‬ ‫‬‫‪Post A.10.9‬‬ ‫د‪ .‬ﻋﺻﺎم ﺷرف ﯾﺧط إﺳﻣﮫ ﺑﺣروف ﻣن ﻧور ﻓﻰ ﺗﺎرﯾﺦ ﻣﺻر اﻟﺣدﯾث‬ ‫أول رﺋﯾس وزراء ﻧوﻋﻰ ﻋﻠﯾﮫ ﻋﻠﻰ اﻷﻗل ﺑﯾﺷﺗﻐل ﻋﻠﺷﺎن اﻟﺷﻌب و اﻟﺑﻠد‪ ..‬ﻣش اﻟﻧظﺎم و اﻟﻛرﺳﻰ اﻟﻠﻰ ﻗﺎﻋد‬ ‫ﻋﻠﯾﮫ‬ ‫ﷲ ﻋـﻠـﯾـﻛـﻰ و ﻋـﻠـﻰ وﻻدك ﯾـﺎ ﻣــﺻــر‬ ‫]‪[Dated 16 April 2011‬‬ ‫‪Post A.10.10‬‬ ‫ﷲ أﻛﺑر‪ ..‬أﻗﺳم ﺑﺎ… إﺑﺗﺳﻣت ﺑﺄﻛﺗر ﻣﻣﺎ ﺗﺗﺧﯾﻠوا‪ ..‬ﻣﺻر ﻣﺣﺗﺎﺟﺔ ﻟوﻻدھﺎ‪ ..‬ﻣﺎﺗﻘوﻟﯾش ﺑﻘﻰ ﻣﺳﻠم وﻣﺳﯾﺣﻲ‪ ,‬ﺳﻠﻔﻲ‬ ‫وﻻ إﺧواﻧﻲ‪ ,‬وﻻ ﺷﺑﺎب ﺳﯾس ﻣﺻرﯾﯾن إﺣﻧﺎ‬ ‫]‪[Dated 25 April 2011‬‬ ‫‪Post A.10.11‬‬ ‫اﻟﺛورة ﻣش ﻣﻌﻧﺎھﺎ اﻧﻧﺎ ﻧﻐﯾر رؤوس ﻧظﺎم ﻓﺎﺳد وﺑس‪....‬اﻟﺛورة اﻛﺑر ﻣن ﻛدا واﻋﻣق ﻣن ﻛدا‪..‬اﻟﺛورة ﺗﻌﻧﻰ ﺗﻐﯾﯾر‬ ‫ﺣﻘﯾﻘﻰ ﻟﻼﺣﺳن ﯾﺣس ﺑﯾﮫ اﻟﻣواطن اﻟﻌﺎدى ﻓﻰ ﺣﯾﺎﺗﮫ اﻟﯾوﻣﯾﺔ‪...‬ﻟﺳﮫ ﺑﻘﺎﯾﺎ اﻟﻔﺳﺎد ﻣﺗﻐﻠﻐﻠﺔ وﻣﺎدة ﺟذورھﺎ ﻓﻰ‬ ‫ﻣﺟﺗﻣﻌﻧﺎ‪...‬وﻟﺳﮫ اﻟﻣﺷوار طوﯾل ﻋﺷﺎن ﻧﻐﯾره ﻟﻼﺣﺳن‪....‬اﻟﺛورة ﻋﻠﻣﺗﻧﺎ اﻧﻧﺎ ﻣﻧﺳﻛﺗش ﻋﻠﻰ اﻟظﻠم واﻧﻧﺎ ﻧﺎﺧد ﺣﻘﻧﺎ‬ ‫ﻣﮭﻣﺎ ﻛﺎن اﻟﺗﻣن‪...‬اذا ﻛﺎن ھﻣﺎ ﻋﻧدھم دوﻟﺔ ﻓﺳﺎد ﻋﻣﯾﻘﺔ ﻓﺎﺣﻧﺎ ھﻧﺧﻠﻰ ﺛورﺗﻧﺎ اﻛﺛر ﻋﻣﻘﺎ ﻋﺷﺎن ﺗوﺻل ﻟﻛل ﻓﺎﺳد‬ ‫وﺗﻐﯾره‪......‬ﺛورﺗﻧﺎ ﻣﺳﺗﻣرة‬ ‫]‪[Dated 29 June 2012‬‬ ‫‪A.11 Photo and video commentaries‬‬ ‫‪Post A.11.1‬‬ ‫اﻻﻓطﺎر ﺑﺗﺎﻋﻧﺎ ﻣش ﺑﯾﻛون ﺧﻧﯾق ‪..‬وﻻ اﺣﻧﺎ ﺷﺑﺎب ﺧﻧﯾق اﺣﻧﺎ ﺷﺑﺎب ﻋﺎدى‪ ..‬ﺑﻧﮭزر وﺑﻧﻠﻌب‪ ..‬ﻓﯾﻧﺎ ﺳوﻛﺎ وﻟوﻛﺎ‬ ‫وﻣوﺗﺎ وﺷﻛﻠﻣﮫ‪..‬ﺑس اﻟﻔرق اﻧﻧﺎ ﻣﮭﻣوﻣﯾن ﺑﺎﻟﺑﻠد دى‪ ..‬وﻣوﺟوﻋﯾن ﺑﺄوﺟﺎﻋﮭﺎ ‪..‬وﻧﻔﺳﻧﺎ ﻧﻐﯾرھﺎ ﻟﻸﻓﺿل‪..‬اﺣﻧﺎ‬ ‫ﺷﺑﺎب ﻣﺻر ‪..‬ﺷﺑﺎب ﺣر‪..‬ﺑﯾﺣب ﻣﺻر‬ ‫]‪[Dated August 2010‬‬ ‫‪Post A.11.2‬‬ ‫ﻛداب ﻗوى‪ ....‬داﻧﺗﺎ ﺑﺗﺣﺞ ﯾﺎ ﻣﻧﯾل‪ .‬إﺗﻠم و ﻟم ﻟﺳﺎﻧك ﺑﻘﻰ‬ ‫]‪[Dated 7 November 2010‬‬ ‫‪Post A.11.3‬‬ ‫دي اﻷﻓﻛﺎر اﻟﻠﻲ زرﻋﮭﺎ اﻟﺣزب اﻟوطﻧﻲ اﻟﻔﺎﺳد ﻓﻲ اﻟﻧﺎس اﻟﺑﺳطﺎء واﻟﻐﻼﺑﺔ‪ ..‬إﺑﻌد ﻋن اﻟﺳﯾﺎﺳﺔ‪ ,‬وإﻣﺷﻲ ﺟﻧب‬ ‫اﻟﺣﯾط‪ ,‬وﻋﺎﯾزﯾن ﻧﺎﻛل ﻋﯾش‪ ..‬وآﻻف اﻟﺟﻣل اﻟﻣوروﺛﺔ اﻟﻠﻲ ﻋﻣوا ﺑﯾﮭﺎ اﻟﻧﺎس وﺿﻠﻠوھم وﺧوّ ﻓوھم‪ ..‬ﻛل واﺣد‬ ‫ﻣن ﺣﻘﮫ ﯾﻌﯾش ﺑﺣرﯾﺔ وﻛراﻣﮫ ﻓﻲ ﺑﻠده‬ ‫]‪[Dated 3 December 2010‬‬ ‫‪Post A.11.4‬‬ ‫‪- 201‬‬ ‫!‬ ‫‬‫أﻏﻧﯾﺔ ﻣؤﻟﻣﺔ وﻣﻌﺑّرة ﻷﺑﻌد ﻣدى ﻋن اﻟﺗﻔﻛﯾر ﻓﻲ اﻟﮭﺟرة‪ ..‬ﺗﻔﺗﻛروا ﻟو ﻛﻠﻧﺎ ھﺎﺟرﻧﺎ ﺑﺟد‪ ..‬ﻣﯾن ھﺎﯾﻘف ﻟﻣﺻر‬ ‫اﻟﺣزﯾﻧﺔ‪ ,‬وﯾﻣﺳﺢ دﻣوﻋﮭﺎ‪ ,‬ﻣﯾن ﯾﻣد ﻟﮭﺎ إﯾده واﻟدﯾﺎﺑﺔ ب ﺗﻧﮭش ﻛل ﯾوم ف ﻟﺣﻣﮭﺎ‪ ..‬ﻧﺳﯾﺑﮭﺎ ﻟﻣﯾن؟ ﺣد ﯾﻌرف؟‬ ‫]‪[Dated November 2010‬‬ ‫‪Post A.11.5‬‬ ‫أﻏﻧﯾﺔ ﻣؤﻟﻣﺔ وﻣﻌﺑّرة ﻷﺑﻌد ﻣدى ﻋن اﻟﺗﻔﻛﯾر ﻓﻲ اﻟﮭﺟرة‪ ..‬ﺗﻔﺗﻛروا ﻟو ﻛﻠﻧﺎ ھﺎﺟرﻧﺎ ﺑﺟد‪ ..‬ﻣﯾن ھﺎﯾﻘف ﻟﻣﺻر‬ ‫اﻟﺣزﯾﻧﺔ‪ ,‬وﯾﻣﺳﺢ دﻣوﻋﮭﺎ‪ ,‬ﻣﯾن ﯾﻣد ﻟﮭﺎ إﯾده واﻟدﯾﺎﺑﺔ ب ﺗﻧﮭش ﻛل ﯾوم ف ﻟﺣﻣﮭﺎ‪ ..‬ﻧﺳﯾﺑﮭﺎ ﻟﻣﯾن؟ ﺣد ﯾﻌرف؟‬ ‫]‪[Dated 27 November 2010‬‬ ‫‪Post A.11.6‬‬ ‫ﺑﺎﻷﻣس ﻓﻲ ﺣﻠﻘﺔ "آﺧر ﻛﻼم" ﻋﻧدﻣﺎ ﺳﺄل ﯾﺳري ﻓودة اﻟرواﺋﻲ اﻟراﺋﻊ ﻋﻼء اﻷﺳواﻧﻲ ھل أﻧت ﻣﺗﻔﺎﺋل رﻏم ﻛل‬ ‫ﻣﺎ ﺗﻣر ﺑﮫ ﻣﺻر؟ ف رد ﻋﻼء اﻷﺳواﻧﻲ ﺑﺈﺟﺎﺑﺔ راﺋﻌﺔ ﺣﯾث ذﻛر أن ﺟزء ﻣن ﺗﻔﺎﺋﻠﮫ ﺑﺳﺑﺑﻛم أﻧﺗم وﻗﺎل‪ :‬ﺗﻧدھش‬ ‫إﻧك ﺗﺷوف ﺷﺑﺎب ﯾطﺎﻟب ﺑﺎﻟﺗﻐﯾﯾر‪ ,‬وﯾطﺎﻟب ﺑﺣﻘوﻗﮫ‪ ,‬وﻣﺎﺗﻌرﻓش دول طﻠﻌوا ﻛده إزاى‪ ,‬رﻏم اﻟﺗﻌﻠﯾم واﻹﻋﻼم‬ ‫اﻟﻣﺿﻠل! دي ﺗﺣﯾﺔ ﻣن أدﯾب ﻛﺑﯾر ﻟﻛم ﯾﺎ ﺷﺑﺎب‬ ‫]‪[Dated 4 December 2010‬‬ ‫‪Post A.11.7‬‬ ‫ﻋﻧدﻣﺎ ﯾﻣﻸ اﻟﺣق ﻗﻠﺑك‪ ,‬ﺗﻧدﻟﻊ اﻟﻧﺎر إن ﺗﺗﻧ ّﻔس‪ ,‬وﻟﺳﺎن اﻟﺧﯾﺎﻧﺔ ﯾﺧرس‬ ‫دﻛﺗور ﻣﺣﻣد اﻟﺑرادﻋﻲ ﻓﻲ ﺣدﯾث راﺋﻊ وﻟﮭﺟﺗﮫ ﺿد اﻟﻧظﺎم ﺗﻌﻠو ﺑﺣﻛﻣﺔ ﻻ ﻟﺑس ﻓﯾﮭﺎ‬ ‫إﺳﻣﻌوه‪ ..‬ﺑﯾﺗﻛﻠم ﻋن اﻟﻣﻘﺎوﻣﺔ وﻋن اﻹﻧﺳﺎﻧﯾﺔ واﻟﺣﯾﺎة اﻟﻛرﯾﻣﺔ‪ ,‬ﺣﺎﺟﺎت ﻗرﺑﻧﺎ ﻧﻧﺳﺎھﺎ‬ ‫]‪[Dated 8 December 2010‬‬ ‫‪Post A.11.8‬‬ ‫وھﻧﺎ إﺣﺗﺞ اﻟرﺋﯾس ﻋﻠﻰ ﺗزوﯾر اﻹﻧﺗﺧﺎﺑﺎت ﻗﺎﺋﻼً‪ ..‬ﻓﺿﻠﺗوا ﺗﻘوﻟوﻟﻲ ﻓﻛر ﺟدﯾد ﻓﻛر ﺟدﯾد‪ ,‬ﻣﻊ إن اﻟﻔﻛر اﻟﻘدﯾم‬ ‫ﻛﺎن ﺷﻐﺎل زى اﻟﺣﻼوة ﯾﺎ ﺷوﯾﺔ أﻏﺑﯾﺎ‬ ‫]‪[Dated 9 December 2010‬‬ ‫‪Post A.11.9‬‬ ‫ﻓﻲ ﺗﺣﻠﯾل ﻋﺑﻘري ﻗﺎل ﻋﺑد ﷲ ﻛﻣﺎل )رﺋﯾس ﺗﺣرﯾر روزاﻟﯾوﺳف اﻟﺣﻛوﻣﯾﺔ( أن ﻋﻠم ﺷﺑﺎب ‪ 6‬أﺑرﯾل‪ ,‬اﻟﻠون‬ ‫اﻷﺳود ﻓﯾﮫ ﯾدل ﻋﻠﻰ ﻋودة اﻟﺟﻣﺎﻋﺎت اﻹﺳﻼﻣﯾﺔ اﻟﺗﻛﻔﯾرﯾﺔ‪ ,‬واﻟﻘﺑﺿﺔ ﻓﻲ ھذا اﻟﻌﻠم رﻣز ﻓﺎﺷﻲ!! ﯾﻌﻧﻲ إﺣﻧﺎ‬ ‫ﺗﻛﻔﯾرﯾﯾن ﻓﺎﺷﯾﯾن ﯾﺎ ﺷﺑﺎب‪ ..‬أﻟف ﻣﺑروك ‪(((:‬‬ ‫]‪[Dated 15 December 2010‬‬ ‫‪Post A.11.10‬‬ ‫ﺑﺎﻷﻣس ﻓﻲ ﺣﻠﻘﺔ "آﺧر ﻛﻼم" ﻋﻧدﻣﺎ ﺳﺄل ﯾﺳري ﻓودة اﻟرواﺋﻲ اﻟراﺋﻊ ﻋﻼء اﻷﺳواﻧﻲ ھل أﻧت ﻣﺗﻔﺎﺋل رﻏم ﻛل‬ ‫ﻣﺎ ﺗﻣر ﺑﮫ ﻣﺻر؟ ف رد ﻋﻼء اﻷﺳواﻧﻲ ﺑﺈﺟﺎﺑﺔ راﺋﻌﺔ ﺣﯾث ذﻛر أن ﺟزء ﻣن ﺗﻔﺎﺋﻠﮫ ﺑﺳﺑﺑﻛم أﻧﺗم وﻗﺎل‪ :‬ﺗﻧدھش‬ ‫إﻧك ﺗﺷوف ﺷﺑﺎب ﯾطﺎﻟب ﺑﺎﻟﺗﻐﯾﯾر‪ ,‬وﯾطﺎﻟب ﺑﺣﻘوﻗﮫ‪ ,‬وﻣﺎﺗﻌرﻓش دول طﻠﻌوا ﻛده إزاى‪ ,‬رﻏم اﻟﺗﻌﻠﯾم واﻹﻋﻼم‬ ‫اﻟﻣﺿﻠل! دي ﺗﺣﯾﺔ ﻣن أدﯾب ﻛﺑﯾر ﻟﻛم ﯾﺎ ﺷﺑﺎب‬ ‫]‪[Dated December 2010‬‬ ‫‪- 202‬‬ ‫!‬ ‫‬‫‪Post A.11.11‬‬ ‫ﻣﺟزرة ﻓﻲ ﻣدﯾﻧﺔ اﻟﺑﯾﺿﺎ اﻟﻠﯾﺑﯾﺔ‬ ‫اﻟﻔﯾدﯾو ده ﺗم ﺣذﻓﺔ ﻣن ﯾوﺗﯾوب ﻹﺣﺗواﺋﮫ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣﺷﺎھد ﻗﺎﺳﯾﺔ‪ ..‬ﺗﻠك اﻟﻣﺷﺎھد ھﻰ ﺻﻧﯾﻌﺔ اﻟﻣﺟرم اﻹرھﺎﺑﻲ ﻣﻌﻣر‬ ‫اﻟﻘذاﻓﻲ اﻟﻠﻲ اﺳﺗﻌﺎن ﺑﺎﻟﻣرﺗزﻗﺔ اﻻﻓﺎرﻗﺔ ﻟﻘﺗل ﺷﻌﺑﮫ‪ ..‬رﺟﺎءاً ﻟﻠﻲ ﺑﯾﺗﻌب ﻣن اﻟﻣﺷﺎھد اﻟدﻣوﯾﺔ‪ ,‬ﻻ ﺗﺷﺎھد اﻟﻔﯾدﯾو‬ ‫ﻗﺑل ﻣرور ‪ 12‬ﺛﺎﻧﯾﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﺑداﯾﺗﮫ‬ ‫]‪[Dated 20 February 2011‬‬ ‫‪Post A.11.12‬‬ ‫ﺣﺳﻧﻲ ﻣﺑﺎرك ﯾدﻋم إﺳراﺋﯾل‬ ‫ﺣواﻟﻲ ‪ 600‬ﻣﻠﯾﺎر ﺟﻧﯾﺔ ﻣﺻري و ّﻓرھم اﻟﻧظﺎم اﻟﻣﺻري ﻹﺳراﺋﯾل!! ﯾﺎ ﺗرى اﻟﻣﺑﻠﻎ ده ﻛﺎن ﯾﺗﻌﻣل ﺑﯾﮫ ﻛﺎم أﻟف‬ ‫ﺷﻘﺔ‪ ,‬وﻛﺎم أﻟف ﻣﺳﺗﺷﻔﻰ ﻛوﯾﺳﺔ‪ ,‬وﻛﺎم أﻟف ﻣدرﺳﺔ‪ ,‬أو ﻛﺎم أﻟف ﻣﺻ ّﻧﻊ ﯾﺷ ّﻐل اﻟﺷﺑﺎب!‬ ‫ﻛﺎﻧوا ﺑﯾﺎﺧدوا ﻣن ﻓﻠوﺳﻧﺎ وﯾدﻋﻣوا اﻹﺳراﺋﯾﻠﻲ؟‬ ‫]‪[Dated 28 February 2011‬‬ ‫‪Post A.11.13‬‬ ‫أﻧﺎ ﻣواطن ﻣﺻري ھﺎﻧزل ﯾوم اﻟﺳﺑت إن ﺷﺎء ﷲ وأﻗول ﻷ‪ ..‬ﺷﯾّر اﻟﻔﯾدﯾو ﻟﻛل ﻣﺻر‪ ..‬ﻋﻣرو ﻣﺻطﻔﻰ‪ ,‬ﻣﻌز‬ ‫ﻣﺳﻌود‪ ,‬أﺣﻣد اﻟﻌﺳﯾﻠﻲ‪ ,‬ﻣﺣﻣد دﯾﺎب‪ ,‬ﻋﻣرو ﻣوﺳﻰ‪ ,‬ﻋﻣرو ﺧﺎﻟد‪ ,‬ﻣﺣﻣد اﻟﺑرادﻋﻲ‪ ,‬ﻋﻣرو ﺣﻣزاوي‪ ,‬ﺷرﯾف‬ ‫ﻋرﻓﺔ‪ ,‬ﻧﺟﯾب ﺳوﯾراس‪ ,‬رﺷﺎ اﻟﺟﻣﺎل‪ ,‬أﺣﻣد ﺣﻠﻣﻲ‪ ,‬ﺑﺳﻣﺔ‪ ,‬ﻣﻧﻰ ذﻛﻲ‬ ‫]‪[Dated 16 March 2011‬‬ ‫‪Post A.11.14‬‬ ‫ﻣﺻر ﺗﺣﺗﺎج إﻟﻰ ھذه اﻟروح‬ ‫‪.‬‬ ‫ﺷﺑﺎب أﻧﺎ ﻋﺎرف إﻧﻛم ﺑﻌﺗوا ﻛﺗﯾر ﻓﯾدﯾو ﻏزوة اﻟﺻﻧدوق واﻟﻔﯾدﯾو اﻟﺗﺎﻧﻲ اﻟﻠﻲ ھﺎﺟم اﻟﻣﺻرﯾﯾن اﻟﻠﻲ ﻗﺎﻟوا ﻷ‪..‬‬ ‫وﻣﻘدّر ﺟداً ﺣﺟم اﻟﺻدﻣﺔ واﻟﻣرارة اﻟﻠﻲ ﺣس ﺑﯾﮭﺎ ﻛل واﺣد ﻓﯾﻧﺎ ﺷﺎف اﻟﻛﻼم ده ﺻﺎدر ﻋن ﺷﯾوخ‪ ..‬ﻟﻛن ﻧﺷر‬ ‫اﻷﻓﻛﺎر دي ﺗﺎﻧﻲ‪ ,‬ﻛﺎن ھﺎﯾزوّ د ﺣﺎﻟﺔ اﻹﺣﺗﻘﺎن واﻟﺗﺻدّع اﻟﻠﻲ دﺧﻠﻧﺎھﺎ ﻛﻠﻧﺎ | ھﻧﺎ ﻋﺎﯾز أﻗول ﺷﻛراً ﻟﻠﺷﯾﺦ ﻣﺣﻣد‬ ‫ﺣﺳﺎن ﻋﻠﻰ ﻣوﻗﻔﮫ ده )ﻗﺑل اﻹﺳﺗﻔﺗﺎء( وإن اﻟروح اﻟطﯾﺑﺔ دي ھﻰ اﻟﻠﻲ ﻣﻔروض ﺗﺳود‪ ..‬إﺣﻧﺎ ﻧﺷﻛر ﻛل ﺟﮭود‬ ‫ﻟﺗوﺣﯾد ﺻﻔوف اﻟﻣﺻرﯾﯾن وﻧﺷر اﻟﺗﺳﺎﻣﺢ ﺑﯾﻧﮭم‪ ,‬وﺑﺎﻟﻣﺛل ھﺎﻧﻘف ﻟﻛل ﻣﺣﺎوﻟﺔ ﻟﺗﻔرﯾﻘﻧﺎ أو ﺗﺧوﯾﻔﻧﺎ أو اﻟﻛذب ﻋﻠﯾﻧﺎ‬ ‫وﺗﺿﻠﯾﻠﻧﺎ | وﯾﺑﻘﻰ ﻓﻲ اﻻﺧﯾر أن‪ :‬ﻧﺗﻌﺎون ﻓﯾﻣﺎ اﺗﻔﻘﻧﺎ ﻋﻠﯾﮫ‪ ،‬وﯾﻌذر ﺑﻌﺿﻧﺎ ﺑﻌﺿًﺎ ﻓﯾﻣﺎ اﺧﺗﻠﻔﻧﺎ ﻓﯾﮫ‬ ‫]‪[Dated 22 March 2011‬‬ ‫‪Post A.11.15‬‬ ‫ظﺑﺎط وﺟﻧود ﺟﯾش ﻣﺻر اﻟﻌظﯾم‪ ,‬وﺗﻌﻠﯾﻣﺎت ﻗﺎﺋد اﻟﻛﺗﯾﺑﺔ اﻟﻣﺻري اﻟراﺋﻊ ﻟﻠﺟﻧود ﻗﺑﯾل اﻹﺷراف ﻋﻠﻰ ﺻﻧﺎدﯾق‬ ‫اﻹﺳﺗﻔﺗﺎء‪ ..‬ﻛﻠﻣﺎﺗﮫ ﯾﺣق ﻟﮭﺎ أن ُﺗﻛﺗﺑت ﺑﺣروف اﻟﻧور ﻋﻠﻰ ﺻﻔﺣﺎت اﻟذھب‪ ..‬راﺋﻊ ﺟداً‬ ‫]‪[Dated 24 March 2011‬‬ ‫‪Post A.11.16‬‬ ‫‪- 203‬‬ ‫!‬ ‫‬‫وﺣﺿرﺗك ھرﺑت ﻟﯾﮫ ﻟﻣﺎ اﻧت واﺛق؟ وﻻ اﻟﻠﻰ ھرب ﺑﯾرﺟﻊ واﻟﻠﻰ اﺧﺗﻔﻰ ﺑﯾظﮭر واﻟﻣﻘرات اﻟﻠﻰ اﺗﻘﻔﻠت رﺟﻌت‬ ‫اﺗﻔﺗﺣت‪ .‬اﻟﻧظﺎم راﺟﻊ ده ﺣﻠﻣﻛم و اﻟﺛورة راﺟﻌﺔ ده وﻋدﻧﺎ‬ ‫]‪[Dated 13 June 2012‬‬ ‫‪Post A.11.17‬‬ ‫ﻟﻐﺎﯾﺔ ﻣﺎ اﻟﻣواطن ده ﯾﻼﻗﻰ ﺷﻘﺔ ﯾﻧﺎم ﻓﯾﮭﺎ ھﻧﻔﺿل ﻣﻛﻣﻠﯾن ‪ ،‬و ﻟﻐﺎﯾﺔ ﻣﺎ اﻟراﺟل ده ﯾﺑﻘﻰ ﻟﮫ ﺷﻐل ﯾﻘدر ﯾﺻرف‬ ‫ﺑﯾﮫ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻧﻔﺳﮫ و ﯾﺗﺟوز ﺑﯾﮫ و ﯾﺻرف ﻋﻠﻰ أوﻻده اﺣﻧﺎ ﻣﻛﻣﻠﯾن ‪ ،‬و ﻟﻐﺎﯾﺔ ﻣﺎ ﯾﺣس اﻟراﺟل ده ﺑﻛراﻣﺗﮫ ﻛﺎﻧﺳﺎن‬ ‫و ﯾﻔﺧر أﻧﮫ اﺗوﻟد و ﺟﻧﺳﯾﺗﮫ ﻣﺻرﯾﺔ اﺣﻧﺎ ﻣﻛﻣﻠﯾن‪.‬‬ ‫]‪[Dated 22 June 2012‬‬ ‫‪A.12 Appeals‬‬ ‫]‪[Relating to 6 April 2009 protest:‬‬ ‫‪Post A.12.1‬‬ ‫ﻣﺎﺗﺳﺑش ﺣﻘك ﺷﺎرك وﻛﻔﺎﯾﺔ ﺳﻠﺑﯾﺔ اﻟﻠﻰ ﺑﯾﺣﺻل ﻓﻰ ﺑﻠدﻧﺎ ﻣش ﺷوﯾﺔ‬ ‫]‪[Dated 20 March 2009‬‬ ‫‪Post A.12.2‬‬ ‫إﺿـراب ﻋـﺎم ﻟﺷـﻌـب ﻣـﺻـر‪ 6 ..‬إﺑرﯾل ‪ ..2009‬ﺣﻘﻧﺎ و ھﻧﺎﺧده‬ ‫]‪[Dated 21 March 2009‬‬ ‫‪Post A.12.3‬‬ ‫ﻓــ ّﻛــر ﻓﻰ ﺑــﻠــدك ﻟو َﻣــرة‪ ...‬ﻓــ ّﻛــر ﻓﻰ ﻋــﯾــﺷــﺗــك اﻟﻣُــرة‪ ...‬إﺿــراب ‪ 6‬إﺑــرﯾــل ‪ ..2009‬ﺣــﻘــﻧــﺎ و‬ ‫ھــﻧــﺎﺧــده‬ ‫]‪[Dated 21 March 2009‬‬ ‫‪Post A.12.4‬‬ ‫‪Down with Mubarak.. 6th of April'09.. a general strike & protest in Egypt‬‬ ‫‪ ...against the corrupted regime of Mubarak's family‬إﺿــراب ‪ 6‬إﺑــرﯾــل ‪..2009‬‬ ‫ﺣــﻘــﻧــﺎ و ھــﻧــﺎﺧــده‬ ‫]‪[Dated 31 March 2009‬‬ ‫‪Post A.12.5‬‬ ‫زﻣّـــــــــــر‪ ..‬ﺻ ّﻔــــــــــــــر‪ ..‬ﺧﺑّـــــــــــط‪ ..‬ﻛﻠﻛِـــــــــــس‪ ..‬إﻋﻣل ﺻـــــــــــــــــــــــــــوت‬ ‫]‪[Dated 22 November 2010‬‬ ‫‪- 204‬‬ ‫!‬ ‫‬‫]‪[Relating to January 25 protest:‬‬ ‫‪Post A.12.6‬‬ ‫ﺣﻘﯾﻘﻲ ﯾﺎ ﺷﺑﺎب ﺗﺣﯾﺔ ﺟﺎﻣدة ﺟداً ﻣﻧﻧﺎ‪ ,‬ﻟﻛل ﻋﺿو ﺑﺎﻟﺻﻔﺣﺔ ﺑﻌت ﻟﻧﺎ وطﻠب اﻹﻧﺿﻣﺎم‪ ..‬ﺷﻰء ﻣُﻔرح إن اﻟﻌدد‬ ‫اﻟﻛﺑﯾر ده ﻣﻧﻧﺎ ﯾﻛون ﻋﻧده رﻏﺑﺔ ﺣﻘﯾﻘﯾﺔ إﻧﮫ ﯾﻌﻣل ﺷﻰء ﻣﻠﻣوس ﻟﻣﺻر‪ ..‬ﻛﻠﻧﺎ ھﻧﺎ ﺳواء أﻋﺿﺎء ﻓﻲ ‪ 6‬أﺑرﯾل‪ ,‬أو‬ ‫ﺑس أﻋﺿﺎء ﻓﻲ اﻟﺻﻔﺣﺔ ھﺎﻧﺣﺎول ﻧﻣد إﯾدﯾﻧﺎ ﻟﺑﻌض وﻧﻌﻣل ﺣﺎﺟﺔ ﻟﺑﻠدﻧﺎ‪ ..‬أﻧﺎ ﻣﺗﻔﺎﺋل ﺟداً واﻷﻣل ﻓﻲ رﺑﻧﺎ ﻛﺑﯾر‪,‬‬ ‫ﺣد ﻓﯾﻛم ﻣﺗﻔﺎﺋل ﻣﻌﺎﯾﺎ؟‬ ‫]‪[Dated 11 December 2010‬‬ ‫‪Post A.12.7‬‬ ‫ﺷﺑﺎب ﻣﺻر ﻟﻣﺎ ب ﯾﻛون إﯾد واﺣدة ب ﯾﻌﻣل ﻛﺗﯾر‬ ‫إﺿراب ‪ 6‬أﺑرﯾل ‪2008‬‬ ‫اﻟﺣﻛوﻣﺔ ھددت اﻟﻠﻲ ھﺎﯾﺷﺎرك ﻓﯾﮫ‪ ,‬اﻹﺧوان رﻓﺿوا اﻟﻣﺷﺎرﻛﺔ ﻓﯾﮫ‪ ,‬اﻷﺣزاب إﺗرﯾﻘت ع اﻟﻠﻲ ھﺎﯾﺷﺎرك ﻓﯾﮫ‬ ‫ﻟﻛن ﺷﺑﺎب ﻣﺻر ﻛﺎن أﻗوى ﻣن اﻟﻛل ﺑﺈﯾﻣﺎﻧﮫ ﺑـ رﺑﻧﺎ وﺑــ ﺣﺑﮫ ﻟﻣﺻر‬ ‫إﺣﻧﺎ ﻧﻘدر ﯾﺎ ﺷﺑﺎب‬ ‫]‪[Dated 11 December 2010‬‬ ‫‪Post A.12.8‬‬ ‫ﺣد ﯾﻌرف ﯾﺷﻣﺦ اﻟﺷﻣﺧﺔ دي ﯾﺎ وﻻد‪ ..‬اﻟرﯾس ﻓﻲ ﻟﺣظﺔ ﺷﻣوخ وإﻧﺷﻣﺎخ‬ ‫]‪[Dated 12 December 2010‬‬ ‫‪Post A.12.9‬‬ ‫ﻛل واﺣد ﻧﺎزل ﯾﺗظﺎھر ﻋﺷﺎن ﻣﺻر ‪ 25‬ﯾﻧﺎﯾر ھو ﻣواطن ﻣﺳﺎﻟم ﻧﺎزل ﯾطﺎﻟب ﺑﺣﻘﮫ وﺣق أھل ﺑﻠده ﻣش أﻛﺗر‪,‬‬ ‫أى إﻋﺗداء ﻋﻠﯾﻧﺎ ﻣرﻓوض‪ ,‬وﺣﻣﯾﺎﺗﻧﺎ ﻷﻧﻔﺳﻧﺎ وﻟزﻣﻼءﻧﺎ ﻣن اﻟﻣﺷﺎرﻛﯾن ﺟﻣﯾﻌﺎ ً ﺣق ﻟﯾﻧﺎ‪ ..‬ﯾﻣﻛن أول ﻣرة ﺗﺣﺻل‬ ‫ﻓﻲ ﻣﺻر ﻣش ﻋﺎرف‪ ,‬ﻟﻛن ھﺎﯾﺑﻘﻰ ﻓﻲ دروع ﻟﺣﻣﺎﯾﺔ اﻟﻣﺗظﺎھرﯾن ﺣﺎل ﻗﺎﻣت اﻟﺷرطﺔ ﺑﺎﻹﻋﺗداء ﺑﺎﻟﺿرب‬ ‫ﻋﻠﯾﻧﺎ‪ ..‬اﻹﻋﺗداء ﻣﻧﮭم ﻟن ﻧرده ﺑﺈﻋﺗداء ﯾﺎ رﯾت ﻣﺎﻧﻧﺳﺎش‬ ‫]‪[Dated 23 January 2011‬‬ ‫‪Post A.12.10‬‬ ‫ﻣﺻر اﻷم دي ھم ﻣﺻر‪ ..‬اﺳﻣﻌﮭﺎ ﺑﺗدﻋﻲ ﻟﻠﺷﺑﺎب ازاى واﻟﺷﺑﺎب ازاى وھم ﻣﺎﯾﻌرﻓوھﺎش ﯾﺑوﺳوا ﻋﻠﻰ راﺳﮭﺎ‬ ‫واﯾدﯾﮭﺎ‬ ‫ﻣﺻر ﻣﺣﺗﺎﺟﻛم ﯾﺎ وﻻدي‪ ..‬ﻣﺻر ﻣﺣﺗﺎﺟﺎﻛم ﯾﺎ ﺣﺑﺎﯾﺑﻲ‪ ..‬ﷲ ﻣﻌﺎﻛم ﯾﺎ وﻻدي‬ ‫]‪[Dated 26 January 2011‬‬

RELATED PAPERS

RELATED TOPICS

Log In

Fuṣḥá, ‘āmmīyah, or both?: Towards a theoretical framework for written Cairene Arabic

Fuṣḥá, ‘āmmīyah, or both?: Towards a theoretical framework for written Cairene Arabic

Related Papers

RELATED PAPERS

RELATED TOPICS