The Impact of Exposure to MSA on the Acquisition of Basic Language and Literacy Skills in Arabic Elinor Saiegh-Haddad Bar-Ilan University

Reading and oral language  Reading is discovering how the written code maps the oral language. It follows that: 1. linguistic opacity between the oral and the written language should impede the acquisition of reading. 2. Sustained exposure to the written code should facilitate the acquisition of basic reading skills.

Diglossia  Diglossia is a sociolinguistic (not a structuralist) notion. In its original definition (Ferguson, 1959), it was used to describe linguistic contexts where more than one variety of the same language are used for socially distinct and non- overlapping functions.  Later definitions (Fishman, 1972) extended the term to refer to contexts of social bilingualism.

Arabic diglossia  Arabic was used by Ferguson (1959) as a typical case of diglossia. In Arabic the two linguistic codes: Modern Standard Arabic (MSA) and Spoken Arabic vernaculars (SAV) are used for writing and for oral language informal interactions, respectively.  In accordance with Ferguson ’ s classical definition, the two linguistic codes in the Arabic context are linguistically related.

Linguistic Distance  Diglossia is marked by linguistic distance between the oral language, which children acquire as a mother tongue, and the written language, which the majority of children learn at school together with learning how to read in Arabic.  Thus, learning to read in Arabic involves acquiring two systems: an orthographic system and a linguistic system.

Impact on reading acquisition  Saiegh-Haddad (2003, 2004, 2005a, 2005b). 1. Children find novel linguistic structures (MSA structures) significantly more difficult to process than oral language structures (SAV structures). 2. The ability to process MSA structures correlates with reading accuracy and reading fluency in Arabic. PS. These studies have primarily examined phonological awareness.

Current Study  Research questions: 1. Effect of linguistic distance on: a. Phonological representation for MSA words. b. Lexical retrieval for MSA words. c. Linguistic awareness for paired lexical items. 2. Effect of early oral exposure to MSA on the acquisition of these skills.

Participants  Two groups of children were tested: An experimental and a control group.  The experimental group had all been enrolled for at least two years in a private day-care centre that has for more than three decades adopted a language policy of using MSA (or a MSA-SAV code mixed variety) in interacting with children (hereafter, MSA- educated children, N=45).  The control group came from kindergartens in the same city where SAV is the medium of interaction (hereafter, SAV-educated children, N=32).  Children were three, four, and five years old. Children were equated on cognitive skills (RAN, Memory, PA), on SES, on print exposure, and on exposure to MSA at home.

Tasks 1. Word Repetition: Phonological representation for MSA words 2. Picture Naming: MSA word retrieval. 3. SAV Form Production: Linguistic awareness for MSA-SAV paired lexical items.

Phonological Representation  Children's phonological representation for MSA words was tested using a word repetition test.  Three types of MSA words were used: a. words incorporating a MSA CVCC word syllabic structure (e.g. /  / vs. /  ). b. words incorporating a MSA phoneme (e.g., /  / vs. /  ). c. words incorporating both a MSA syllabic structure and a MSA phoneme (e.g., /  / vs. /  ). All words were familiar in their SAV form.

MSA Word Retrieval  A picture naming test was used to measure children's ability to retrieve the MSA lexical representation of high familiarity SAV words.  Three types of words were targeted:  MSA words that differed by the syllabic structure only (e.g., /  / vs. /  /).  MSA words that differed by a consonantal phoneme (e.g.,/  / vs. /  /).  or by both the syllabic and the phonemic structure (e.g. /  / vs. /  ).

Linguistic Awareness for Paired Lexical Items  Children ’ s awareness of the linguistic relatedness between the SAV and the MSA phonological representation of paired lexical items was measured by asking children to produce the SAV form of MSA words.  Three types of MSA words were used:  MSA words that differed by the syllabic structure (e.g., /  / vs. /  /).  MSA words that differed by a phoneme (e.g.,/  / vs. /  /).  MSA words that differed both (e.g. /  / vs. /  ).

Word repetition accuracy by group and linguistic condition

ANOVA: Main Effect of condition significant; Interaction of group by condition significant Word repetition accuracy by group and linguistic condition: 3-year-olds

ANOVA: Main effect of condition significant; Interaction by group significant Word repetition accuracy by group and linguistic condition: 4-year-olds

ANOVA: Main effect of condition significant; Interaction not significant (only 6 kids per group) Word repetition accuracy by group and linguistic condition: 5-year-olds

Lexical retrieval by group and linguistic distance

ANOVA: Main effect of distance significant Lexical retrieval by group and linguistic distance: 3-year-olds

ANOVA: Main effect of distance significant; Interaction by group significant. Lexical retrieval by group and linguistic condition: 4-year-olds

ANOVA: Main effect of distance significant Lexical retrieval by group and linguistic condition: 5-year-olds

Linguistic Awareness of Paired Lexical Items

ANOVA: Condition significant; Interaction by Group significant Linguistic Awareness: MSA → SAV: 3-year-olds

ANOVA: Condition not significant; Interaction by group not significant Linguistic Awareness: MSA → SAV: 4-year-olds

ANOVA: Condition significant; Interaction by Group not significant Linguistic Awareness: MSA → SAV: 5-year-olds

Summary: Linguistic Distance  The type of linguistic distance between MSA and SAV makes reliable predictions about difficulty in children ’ s acquisition of basic language and literacy skills in MSA.  Yet, its effect varies with the type of skill under question.

Summary: Exposure to MSA  “ Naturalistic ” exposure to MSA contributes to the acquisition of some language/ literacy skills.  Yet, it does not automatically result in gains in all skills.

Phonological Representation and Linguistic Distance  Words comprising SAV phonemes but have the syllabic structure CVCC appear to be the most accurately represented in the phonological lexicon of children.  This is followed by words comprising MSA phonemes and then (though not statistically significantly) by those comprising both an MSA phoneme and an MSA syllabic structure.

Phonological Representation and Exposure to MSA  “ Naturalistic ” exposure to MSA enhances the phonological representation of words embodying MSA phonemes.  Phonological representation for CVCC words appears not to be affected by this type of exposure to MSA.  Verbosity, articulation quality, and oral language productive skills may be better predictors of CVCC structures than naturalistic exposure.

Lexical Retrieval: Linguistic Distance  The ability to retrieve the MSA lexical representation of familiar SAV words may be predicted by the type of linguistic distance.  CVCC words are easier than words comprising MSA phonemes. Both are easier than words comprising both MSA phonemes and a CVCC structure.

Lexical Retrieval and Exposure to MSA  Exposure to MSA facilitates very strongly the retrieval of words with MSA phonemes but not those with CVCC structure.  Effect of exposure to MSA on the retrieval of words comprising both MSA phonemes and CVCC structures emerges at the age of four only. This advantage disappears at the age of five.

Linguistic Awareness and Linguistic Distance  Linguistic awareness is affected by the type of linguistic distance.  CVCC words are the easiest to become of, followed by words comprising MSA phonemes, and then words embodying both an MSA phoneme and a CVCC structure.

Linguistic Awareness and Exposure to MSA  Unlike the other two skills, SAV-educated children performed better than MSA-educated children at the age three.  Only at the age of four and five do we begin to see a slight gain in favor of MSA-educated children on CVCC words and on words embodying MSA phonemes, but not on those embodying both.  Interpretation: confounded with metalinguistic development and with oral language productive skills.

Conclusion  It is possible to make reliable predictions about acquisition difficulty by the type of linguistic distance between the target MSA and its representation in the SAV of children.  “ Naturalistic ” exposure to MSA does not automatically result in gains in the acquisition of all language and literacy skills.

The way forward Explicit, Mediated, Structured, Systematic and Planned exposure may prove more beneficial in the acquisition of some language skills. This is especially so given the limitations on quantity, or linguistic input that children receive in this, so called “ naturalistic ” exposure. This question is for future research to pursue.

THANK YOU