The Effect of Diglossia on Literacy in Arabic and Other Languages

  • John Myhill
Part of the Literacy Studies book series (LITS, volume 9)


This paper shows that basic literacy rates in Arabic-speaking countries are far lower than would be expected based upon their relative wealth, and argues that much of the explanation for this lies in their usage of a standard language which is based upon an earlier version of the language which no one speaks anymore—comparative evidence shows that languages of this type around the world consistently have uncommonly low literacy rates. The best policy for addressing this problem, so as to achieve a high rate of literacy while maintaining the traditional written language, would appear to be to use a strategy parallel to that adopted for languages such as Chinese, Japanese, and Sinhala: base early literacy, through the third or fourth grade, on written phonological representations of the different spoken dialects, and then switch to the traditional written language after this, when children are better able to deal with a writing system which is quite different from their own spoken languages.


Arabic Diglossia Language policy Literacy Mother tongue Spoken language Written language. 


  1. Abu-Rabia, S. (2000). Effects of exposure to literary Arabic on reading comprehension in a diglossic situation. Reading and Writing, 13, 147–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alidou, O. (1996). Francophonie, World Bank, and the collapse of the Francophone Africa educational system. CAFA Newsletter, 11.Google Scholar
  3. Azrael, J. R. (Ed.). (1978). Soviet nationality policies and practices. New York: Praeger Publishers.Google Scholar
  4. Azzam, R. (1984). Orthography and reading of the Arabic language. In J. Aaron & R. M. Joshi (Eds.), Reading and writing disorders in different orthographic systems. Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar
  5. Bentin, S., & Ibrahim, R. (1996). New evidence for phonological processing during visual word recognition: The case of Arabic. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 309–323.Google Scholar
  6. Berger, M. (1990). Diglossia within a general theoretical perspective: Charles Ferguson’s concept 30 years later. Multilingua, 9, 285–295.Google Scholar
  7. Bokamba, E. G. (1984). French colonial language policy and its legacy. Studies in Linguistics, 14.Google Scholar
  8. Bokamba, E. G., & Tlou, J. (1997). The consequences of the language policies of African states vis- à-vis education. Proceedings of the VII Conference on African Linguistics. Columbia: Hornbeam.Google Scholar
  9. Browning, R. (1982). Greek diglossia yesterday and today. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 35, 49–68.Google Scholar
  10. Calvet, L.-J. (1974). Linguistique et Colonialisme: Petit Traité de Glottophagie. Paris: Payot.Google Scholar
  11. Daltas, P. (1993). The concept of diglossia from Ferguson to Fishman to Fasold. In I. Philippaki-Warburton, K. Nicolaidis, & M. Sifianou (Eds.), Themes in Greek linguistics: Papers from the first international conference on Greek linguistics. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
  12. Del Castillo, D. (2001). The Arabic publishing scene is a desert, critics say. Chronicle of Higher Education, 47(48), A55–A57.Google Scholar
  13. Doets, C. (1994). Assessment of adult literacy levels: The Dutch case. In Verhoeven. (Ed.), Functional literacy (pp. 321–332). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  14. Downing, J., & Lathan, W. (1967). Evaluating the initial teaching alphabet: A study of the influence of English orthography in learning to read and write. London: Cassell.Google Scholar
  15. Dumont, P., & Maurer, B. (1995). Sociolinguistique du Français en Afrique Francophone. Vanves: EDICEF.Google Scholar
  16. Dutcher, N., & Tucker, G. R. (1997). The use of first and second languages in education: A review of educational experience. Washington D.C.: World Bank, Country Department III.Google Scholar
  17. Eckert, P. (1980). Diglossia: Separate and unequal. Linguistics, 18, 1053–1064.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fellman, J. (1975). On ‘diglossia.’ Language Sciences, 34, 38–39.Google Scholar
  19. Ferguson, C. (1959). Diglossia. Word, 15, 325–340.Google Scholar
  20. Ferguson, C. (1991). Diglossia revisited. Southwest Journal of Linguistics, 10, 214–234.Google Scholar
  21. Fishman, J. A., Conrad, A. W., & Rubal-Lopez, A. (Eds.). (1996). Post-imperial English: Status change in former British and American colonies, 1940–1990. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Frangoudaki, A. (1992). Diglossia and the present language situation in Greece: A sociological approach to the interpretation of diglossia and some hypotheses on today’s linguistic reality. Language in Society, 21, 365–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Frost, R., Katz, L., & Bentin, S. (1987). Strategies for visual word recognition and orthographical depth: A multilingual comparison. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 13, 104–114.Google Scholar
  24. Garra, E. (2007). From a dialect into a language: The cases of English and Arabic. MA thesis, University of Haifa English Department.Google Scholar
  25. Gill, H. (1999). Language choice, language policy and the tradition–modernity debate in culturally mixed postcolonial communities: France and the francophone Maghreb as a Case study. In Y. Suleiman (Ed.), Language and society in the middle east and north Africa. Richmond: Curzon Press.Google Scholar
  26. Gray, W. S. (1956). The teaching of reading and writing. Chicago: Scott Foresman.Google Scholar
  27. Gudschinsky, S. C. (1977). Techniques for functional literacy in indigenous languages and the national language. In T. P. Gorman (Ed.), Language and literacy: Current issues and research. Teheran: International Methods.Google Scholar
  28. Haeri, N. (2009). The elephant in the room: Language and literacy in the Arab world. In D. R. Olson & N. Torrance (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of literacy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Hudson, A. (2002). Outline of a theory of diglossia. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 157, 1–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ibrahim, R., & Aharon-Peretz, J. (2005). Is literary Arabic a second language for native Arab speakers? Evidence from a semantic priming study. The Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 34(1), 51–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ibrahim R., Eviatar, Z., & Aharon-Peretz, J. (2002). The characteristics of Arabic orthography slow its processing. Neuropsychology, 16, 322–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ibrahim, R., Eviatar, Z., & Aharon-Peretz, J. (2007). Metalinguistic awareness and reading performance. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 36, 297–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Khamis-Dakwar, R. (2005). Children’s attitudes towards the diglossia situation in Arabic and its impact on learning. Language, Communities, and Education, 1, 75–86.Google Scholar
  34. Khamis-Dakwar, R. (2007). The development of diglossic morphosyntax in Palestinian Arabic-speaking children. Unpublished dissertation, Columbia University, New York.Google Scholar
  35. Levine, K. (1994). Functional literacy in a changing world. In L. Verhoeven (Ed.), Functional literacy: Theoretical issues and educational implications (pp. 113–131). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  36. Lewis, E. G. (1972). Multilingualism in the Soviet Union: Aspects of language policy and its implementation. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
  37. Maamouri, M. (1998). Language education and human development: Arabic diglossia and its impact on the quality of education in the Arab region. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank.Google Scholar
  38. Mehrotra, S. (1998). Education for all: Policy lessons from high-achieving countries. New York: UNICEF Staff Working Papers.Google Scholar
  39. Myhill, J. (2009). Towards an understanding of the relationship between diglossia and literacy. Hayozma lemexkar yisumi bexinux, on the website of the Israeli Academy.
  40. Okedara, J. T., & Okedara. C. A. (1992). Mother tongue literacy in Nigeria. Annals AAPSS, 520, 91–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Ornstein, J. (1968). Soviet language policy: Continuity and change. In E. Goldhagen (Ed.), Ethnic minorities in the Soviet Union. New York: Frederick A. Praeger.Google Scholar
  42. Palfreyman, D., & el-Khalil, M. (2003). ‘A funky language for teenzz to use’: Representing Gulf Arabic in instant messaging. Journal of Computer- Mediated Communication, 9.Google Scholar
  43. Phillipson, R. (1992). Linguistic imperialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Pool, J. (1978). Soviet language planning: Goals, results, options. In J. P. Azrael (Ed.), Soviet nationality policies and practices. New York: Praeger Publishers.Google Scholar
  45. Powell, R. (2002). Language planning and the British empire: Comparing Pakistan, Malaysia and Kenya. Current Issues in Language Planning, 3, 205–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Roman, G., & Pavard, B. (1987). A comparative study: How we read Arabic and French. In J. K. O’Regan & A. Levy-Schoen (Eds.), Eye movement: From physiology to cognition. Amsterdam: North Holland Elsevier.Google Scholar
  47. Saiegh-Haddad, E. (2003). Linguistic distance and initial reading acquisition: The case of Arabic diglossia. Applied Psycholinguistics, 24, 431–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Saiegh-Haddad, E. (2004). The impact of phonemic and lexical distance on the phonological analysis of words and pseudo-words in a diglossic context. Applied Psycholinguistics, 25, 495–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Saiegh-Haddad, E. (2007). Linguistic constraints on children’s ability to isolate phonemes in Arabic. Applied Psycholinguistics, 28, 605–625.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Saiegh-Haddad, E. (2012). Phonological processing in diglossic Arabic: The role of linguistic distance. In E. Broselow & H. Ouli (Eds.), Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics XXII (pp. 269–280). John Benjamins Publishers.Google Scholar
  51. Saiegh-Haddad, E., Levin, I., Hende, N., & Ziv, M. (2011). The linguistic affiliation constraint and phoneme recognition in diglossic Arabic. Journal of Child Language, 38, 297–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Salhi, K. (2002). Critical imperatives of the French language in the Francophone world: Colonial legacy–postcolonial policy. Current Issues in Language Planning, 3, 317–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Schiffman, H. (1997). Diglossia as a sociolinguistic situation. In F. Coulmas (Ed.), The handbook of sociolinguistics. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  54. Scotton, C. (1986). Diglossia and code switching. In J. Fishman et al. (Eds.), The Fergusonian impact: In honor of Charles A. Ferguson on the occasion of his 65th birthday, vol. 2: Socio-linguistics and the sociology of language. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  55. Simon, G. (1991). Nationalism and policy toward the nationalities in the Soviet union: From totalitarian dictatorship to post-Stalinist society (trans: K. Forster & O. Forster). Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  56. UNESCO. (1953). The use of vernacular languages in education. Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar
  57. Verhoeven, L. (1994). Modeling and promoting functional literacy. In L. Verhoeven (Ed.), Functional literacy: Theoretical issues and educational implications. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  58. Verhoeven, L. (1997). Acquisition of literacy by immigrant children. In C. Pontecorvo (Ed.), Writing development: An interdisciplinary view. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  59. Wagner, D. A. (1993). Literacy, culture, and development: Becoming literate in Morocco. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  60. Wagner, D. A., Spratt J. E., & Ezzaki, A. (1989). Does learning to read in a second language always put a child at a disadvantage? Some counter-evidence from Morocco. Applied Psycholinguistics, 10, 31–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Wexler, P. (1971). Diglossia, language standardization, and purism: Parameters for a typology of literary languages. Lingua, 27, 330–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Wheeler, D. L. (2003). The internet and youth subculture in Kuwait. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 8.Google Scholar
  63. Warschauer, M., El Said, G., & Zohry, A. (2002). Language choice online: Globalization and identity in Egypt. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 7.Google Scholar
  64. Zhang, D., & Liu, Y. (n.d.). Pinyin input experiments in early Chinese literacy instruction in China: Implications for Chinese curricular and pedagogic reform in Singapore.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Deptartment of English Language and LiteratureUniversity of HaifaHaifaIsrael

Personalised recommendations