Table Of ContentJANUA LINGUARUM
STUDIA MEMORIAE
NICOLAI VAN WIJK DEDICATA
edenda curat
C. H. VAN S C H O O N E V E L D
Indiana University
Series Practica 236
CHADIAN AND
SUDANESE ARABIC
IN THE LIGHT OF
COMPARATIVE ARABIC
DIALECTOLOGY
by
A L A N S. K A Y E , P h . D .
California State University
Fullerton, California
1976
MOUTON
THE HAGUE · PARIS
© Copyright 1976 in The Netherlands.
Mouton & Co. Β.V., Publishers, The Hague.
No part of this book may be translated or reproduced in any form, by print, photoprint,
microfilm, or any other means, without written permission from the publishers.
ISBN 90 279 33243
Photoset by Interprint (Malta) Ltd.
and
Printed in The Netherlands by Intercontinental Graphics
PREFACE
The study of Arabic linguistics and Arabic dialectology is mainly limited
to the study of classical Arabic, old Arabic dialects, Middle Arabic
dialects, and some of the modern dialects. The aim of this work is to
present an introduction to selected synchronic and diachronic aspects
of the two most neglected areas of the modern sedentary Arabic dialects,
i.e. Sudanese colloquial Arabic and Chadian Arabic. Sobelman (1962)
presents state of the art articles on Syrian, Egyptian, Arabian, Iraqi,
North African, and Maltese dialects. In chapters 1 and 2 of this work,
we have presented state of the art papers which indicate the present
condition of our knowledge. We have also tried to present outlines of
the grammar of each dialect. The lack of scholarly attention to these
major dialects is due to the relatively remote geographical positions of
the Sudan and Chad as well as to dialectologists' preference for more
"civilized" areas in which to do research, e.g. Egypt or Lebanon. Even
Maltese, with far fewer speakers than Chadian Arabic, has received
considerable linguistic attention.
Chapter 3 takes a long detailed look at the hypothesis of the Arabic
koine (Ferguson 1959c), and chapters 4 and 5 examine each one of the
proposed features in terms of the two dialects under consideration.
We have endeavored to elucidate some of the intricate problems con-
nected with this subject, and to demonstrate the crucial importance of
Sudanese colloquial Arabic and Chadian Arabic materials for a full
understanding of the history of Arabic. We have tried not to chop the
subject up too much and not to dwell upon too many isolated details, but
rather to follow and emphasize those details which are in fact inter-
connected. Our principal goal is a more or less complete picture of the
significance of both of these macrodialects, rather than a presentation of
grammatical details. Anyone who has studied classical Arabic and one
modern dialect can see the interest and fascination for both of these
dialects — a fascination which I first developed in 1967-68 while partici-
pating in Joshua Blau's seminars in Arabic dialectology at the Univer-
vi PREFACE
sity of California, Berkeley, where he was a Visiting Professor.
We should still welcome studies on Sudanese colloquial Arabic and
Chadian Arabic, especially on the subdialects, but this would require
a team effort which is not possible in the near future because of the
civil wars ravaging both countries.
When I first looked at both dialects, I frankly did not believe much
of the data available in some parts of the literature. I therefore thought
that I should travel to both the Sudan and Chad to confirm or reject
many of the statements in these sources. This I was able to do from June
1, 1970, to September 1, 1970, through a grant of the National Science
Foundation, Program in Anthropology, GS-2946, which enabled meto
spend three months in Chad and the Sudan gathering information.
Grateful acknowledgement must be recorded to the National Science
Foundation for this aid. My own personal observations have largely
contradicted most of the statements in available linguistic materials.
Much of this work is taken into consideration and is observable in the
following pages of this work.
Finally, I wish to thank Professor M. B. Emeneau for his many kind
1
efforts on my behalf — efforts too numerous to mention here.
A. S. K.
Fullerton, Calif.
' The present work was written during 1968-70 and revised in early 1971. The final
version of the manuscript was finished in mid-1971. Thus the many references to work
in progress or forthcoming publications must be viewed in that framework (for instance
the Roth-Laly Lexique, vols. 2-4, were completed in 1972). Also recent events in Chad
and the Sudan have made some of my statements about those two countries out-of-date.
I have also had the opportunity to study Nigerian Arabic in Nigeria during 1973-74
under grants from the National Endowment for the Humanities and the American
Philosophical Society. What I now know about Nigerian Arabic would have enhanced
many parts of the discussion in this book, regretfully. But that is the subject of a future
study.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Preface ν
Table of Contents vi
Abreviations 5
1. Sudanese Coloquial Arabic: The State of the Art 1
1.1. Dialects of Arabic in the Sudan 1
1.2. Historical background of the linguistic structure of
the Sudan 1
1.3. Diversity of dialects 2
1.4. The ned for the first English-Arabic vocabulary . . . 2
1.5. Purpose of a vocabulary 2
1.6. Characteristics of SCA 2
1.7. The earliest manuscripts in SCA 3
1.8. Linguistic features of SCA manuscripts 4
1.9. Variety of material recorded in the tabaqat 4
1.10. Early structure of SCA^ 4
1.1. Poetic structure of the Sukriya dialect 5
1.12. Importance of Amery's work 5
1.13. Amery's aproach to the language 6
1.14. Transcriptional procedure 6
1.15. Shortcomings of Amery's transcription 7
1.16. Voiced pharyngeal spirant in Amery's transcription 7
1.17. Further inadequacies in Amery's transcription . . . . 7
1.18. Clasical Arabic influence on Amery's transcription . 8
1.19. Clasicisms in 'pure 'SCA vocabulary 8
1.20. 'Purity'of the Arabic of the Anglo-Egyptian Sudan 8
1.21. Another treatise of SCA 9
1.22. Sudanese grammar — standard work on SCA . . . . 10
1.23. Nalder's criticism 1
1.24. Shortcomings of Worsley's and Trimingham's
gramars 1
v i l i TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.25. Worsley's statement on description of Sudanese sounds 11
1.26. Influence of emphatic consonants 1
1.27. Trimingham's statement on the same problem . . . . 12
1.28. Counterpoint to Worsley's statement 12
1.29. Ocurence of hamza in SCA 12
1.30. Changes o f ' 12
1.31. Acent in SCA 13
1.32. Increasing publicity of SCA 13
1.3. Value of Hilelson's vocabulary 13
1.34. Hilelson's contribution to the transcription of SCA . 13
1.35. Hilelson's concept of a koine for SCA 13
1.36. Shortcomings of Hilelson's generalizations 14
1.37. Uniquenes of Hilelson's generalizations 15
1.38. Specialized vocabularies of SCA 15
1.39. Nicholson and his specialized vocabulary on the water
whel 15
1.40. Bel's vocabulary and its shortcomings 16
1.41. Burton's work 16
1.42. Failures of Burton's description of Arabic sounds . . 16
1.43. Conveniences of Burton's work 17
1.4. Hilelson's Sudan Arabic Texts 17
1.45. Modifications of orthography 17
1.46. Value of Hilelson's texts 17
1.47. Hillelson's texts as a beginning towards a comparative
gramar of SCA dialects 18
1.48. Dialectal variations in SCA 18
1.49. Manuscripts of SCA dialectology 18
1.50. Importance of Czapkiewicz's articles 19
1.51. Some SCA proverbs acording to Czapkiewicz . . . . 19
1.52. Other works on SCA proverbs 19
1.53. Nursery rhymes 19
1.54. Atiyah 1918 20
1.5. Polite phrases and idioms in SCA 20
1.56. Barclay 1964 20
1.57. Trimingham 1946 20
1.58. Second edition of Trimingham's gramar 20
1.59. Ferguson's criticism of Trimingham's work 21
1.60. Defects of Trimingham's work 21
1.61. Further inadequacies 21
1.62. False generalizations 21
TABLE OF CONTENTS ÌX
1.63. SCA influence in the Sudan 2
1.64. The ned for future SCA studies 2
1.65. Lack of SCA syntactic analysis in previous works . . 22
1.6. Shortcomings of phonemic analysis of SCA 2
1.67. Ned for an Arabic-English dictionary 23
1.68. Future areas for studies of SCA dialects 23
1.69. Amery 1905 23
1.70. Barclay 1965 29
1.71. Burton 1934 29
1.72. Czapkiewicz 1959 35
1.73. Czapkiewicz 1960 36
1.74. Davies 1925 36
1.75. Davies 1926 38
1.76. Davies 1927 38
1.7. Farmer 1939 38
1.78. Ferguson 1949 39
1.79. Field 1952 40
1.80. Hilelson 1921 40
1.81. Hilelson 1925a 41
1.82. Hilelson 1935 45
1.83. Kensdale 195 53
1.84. MacLaughlin 1964 54
1.85. Trimingham 1946 56
1.86 Worsley 1925 73
1.87. Conclusion 81
Notes to Ch. 1 82
2. Chadian Arabic: The State of the Art 91
2.1. Central African varieties of Arabic 91
2.2. Varieties of Chadian Arabic 92
2.3. Pidgin Arabic—Immigrant Arabic—Abéché Arabic 93
2.4. Influence of Arabic on other African languages . . . . 94
2.5. Publications on Arabic dialectology 94
2.6. Fleisch's article on Chadian Arabic 94
2.7. Sources on Chadian Arabic 94
2.8. Lethem's work as the main source 95
2.9. Lethem 1920—the title page 95
2.10. The purpose of Lethem's bok 95
2.1. Some highlights of Lethem's volume 96
2.12. Lethem's introductory note 96
