Different gender, different Arabic? The case of Israel.
Lindquist, Torkel
The present article indicates that women and men write different
Arabic in the Israeli press. These differences are observable in the
frequency of main and secondary clauses (i.e. in sentence length and in
variation), in word order, in the frequency of clauses containing
adjectives, as well as those containing adverbs. We see these
differences in the frequency of verbs without any visible noun, as well
as in the choice of conjunction and the choice of particle of negating
the past. These variations in Modern Standard Arabic (MSA) are due to
the gender of the reader, as is the case with adjectives, where women
writers use markedly fewer adjectives than men do, except when writing
for men. But the variation is otherwise dependent on the gender of the
writer. This alternation is not between grammatical or ungrammatical
Arabic. Indeed, both genders write correct Arabic. Instead it is
(mostly) a question of choice, of style.
Keywords: Arabic, Israel, Media, Gender, Linguistic, Modern
Standard Arabic, Syntax, Men, Women, Differences
**********
The focus of this article lies on differences in the written Arabic
of men and women in the Israeli press. Emphasis is on linguistic
features such as morphology and syntax (2)
A multitude of research has been made during the last century on
the importance of gender in relation to language use. (3) One of the
pioneers was Otto Jespersen, who encountered a language among Indians in
Bolivia that presented clear differences when men in relation to women
used it. These differences appeared in the morphology, the syntax and
the lexicon. As a universal rule, Jespersen suggested the following:
that women, i.e. all over the world, are more conservative while men on
the one hand use more archaic language forms and, at the same time, are
more open to including new terminology. Men, further, have a more
technical language and construct more complicated sentences with
successive secondary clauses, and secondary clauses within secondary
clauses. Women, on the other hand, according to him, rather use main
clauses bound together by the conjunction 'and'. The reasons
behind the differences are found, according to Jespersen, not so much in
the gender as in differences in social rank. He referred to another
language, as an historical comparison: In India women spoke the vulgar
language 'Prakrit', while men spoke the colourful
'Sanskrit'. (4)
Two decades later, Edward Sapir claimed to have found a language
that expressed gender differences the most clearly: 'Jana' of
eastern California, a language that lacked gender, but where men used
other verbs than women in describing the same act, by adding special
endings. Sapir considered whether social taboos could be behind these
differences but found it most unlikely as women had been documented
using male terminology when quoting men. Rather, he too was of the
opinion that the determining factor lies in unequal social ranks of men
and women. Mary R. Haas introduced the importance of the receiver for
how the language is used. In contrast to the former studies, she found,
in 'Koasati' of South East Louisiana that women were the ones
with the most archaic lexica and, also, that the generational aspect was
important. Older women used more archaic forms, while younger women
spoke more like men. (6)
Japanese is one of the more famous languages with recorded
differences between the genders. Thus Janet Shibamoto claimed that
Japanese women not only have special terminology, just for women, but
also special endings that are affixed to words. (7) Women furthermore
have a tendency to reduce syllables in nouns. In prose text in journals,
she presented syntactical variation between the genders in that
women's prose more frequently ended with a noun than did
men's. In Japanese, men on the other hand seemed to use more
adverbs. (8) As above, it was also the opinion of Bernard Saint-Jacques
that social dependency and social rank explain why gender influences the
language, whether it is the gender of the speaker or the listener, and
that this fact might be a universal phenomenon. (9) In Japanese, in
particular, there appears to be a historical prejudice going back to the
formation of a national language, where women are noted to use official
Japanese ungrammatically, or rather in Japanese, 'impolitely',
without formal grammatical forms of respect. (10)
Several leading researchers during the 1970s and 1980s were of the
opinion that the main difference between the language of men and women
was that women very reluctantly change the language they once learned,
i.e. that they are more conservative in this sense. However, at the same
time, it is women who use more new forms. (11)
In a study on power-relations between the genders, Noelle Moreau
presented the opinion that differences in language use exist, and that
these differences are due to unequal identities and power-relations.
(12) Smith had a similar thinking some years earlier. He made the
conclusion that as the internal relations between the genders
(culturally, psychologically, in terms of power) vary from one society
to another, it must be concluded that gender then also will influence
language in varying degrees in different societies. (13) Not to be
forgotten in this context also is later research on 'Language and
Power', where language is considered not in the first place a
consequence of inequality in society, but rather quite the opposite,
where focus lies on the function of language to reinforce these material
and ideological patterns in society. (14)
Indeed, examples of previous research in the field give a rather
fragmented picture. 'Gender and Language' includes fields as
apart as stereotypes, power-relations, social or practical purposes with
the language, (15) the use of specific phrases by each gender, (16)
sentence length, (17) or what gender utilizes which words. (18) Some
theorists even argue against the very existence of meaningful
differences in the language of men and women. (19)
When it comes to research most related to this study, i.e. on
grammar and sentence length, Malka Muchnik shows in her work on Hebrew
press language in Israel that men and women as writers adapt their style
stereotypically according to what the reader is expected to want
according to the gender of the reader. Her conclusion is that what is
most important is not the gender of the writer but rather of the
receiver, something that is clearly expressed as both genders adapt
their styles in the same way. Both men and women will in Hebrew e.g. use
more adjectives in an article intended for women. On the whole, she
finds only minor differences in men's and women's language.
One of these, in Hebrew, is that women use vulgar language (slang) less
than men. (20)
Muchnik uses the following method in order to reveal variation
depending on the gender of the reader: she divides all articles she
examined into three categories, one where the intended audience is
female, one where it is male, and one where the material is supposedly
interesting for both genders. (21)
In this study, too, half of the articles examined have been written
by men and half by women. The articles are also divided into three
groups or headings. When it comes to "topics of interest" for
the one or the other gender, the articles will be examined to verify any
tendency of variation in comparison to articles of common interest. But
an average frequency of the gender will also be considered separately.
No article without signature will be considered. Furthermore, while the
articles vary in size, between some 1500 and 10.000 words, they all have
in common that the chosen length is long enough to let the writer
express his or her Arabic in such a way that makes variation possible.
The statistical frequency of the following grammatical features
will be registered in each article:
1) Syntax:
a) Word Order in main clauses;
I) with order SV ...;
II) with order VS ...;
b) the frequency of equational sentences, here defined as nominal
sentences without the presence of a verb. These therefore do not include
sentences with kana or any of her sisters, i.e. verbs denoting any
aspect of 'to be';
c) the frequency of sentences consisting of verbs without any
visible noun. That is, the noun is expressed in the verb itself, as
'aktobo (I + write). These are many times written in first person;
d) Verbs in passive voice;
e) Secondary clauses;
I) with SV ... order following "inna or any of her sisters;
II) with SV ... order where the subject is a relative pronoun, i.e.
referring to a definite noun;
III) With SV ... order where the subject is not visible but refers
to an indefinite noun;
f) Secondary clauses;
I) with VS ... order where the relative pronoun is not the subject
of the verb beginning the clause;
g) Verbs in the subjunctive;
2) Further, the frequency of
a) Adjectives, either as predicates or describing a noun as subject
of the clause or as object or as adverb. Only one occurrence of
adjectives in each clause will be counted;
b) Adverbs indicating the reason for an act, circumstantial, or
indicating time or space;
c) Particles of negation I) lam; II) ma;
d) Conjunctions, disregarding the many different grammatical
functions of I) wa-; and II) fa-;
There are of course other grammatical features that possibly would
expose variations both in grammar and in style. (22) Sequences of verbs
connected with a conjunction and thus referring to the same subject will
be counted separately, that is each as a separate clause. The results of
the above are presented in tables. Also, noted ungrammaticalities, such
as errors in Agreement, inappropriate case, lacking particles, lacking
verbs, etc. will also be registered in the tables. (23)
In order to select the research material, all the articles,
according to the methodological considerations above, have been examined
in the following examples of Israeli press written in Arabic. All are
published once a week. The editions are furthermore not from the same
day. (24)
There are also other publications in Arabic in Israel. These above
are, however, the most circulated. From all of the articles above, the
following equal number of articles by both genders will be chosen. (25)
In connection to the gender of the writer, a brief presentation of the
content is presented. Group one includes articles of interest mostly for
women. I have chosen from Banorama p. 40 an article written by a woman
(W) (26) about a woman marrying against her will: working name (B1).
Henceforth only the abbreviation is written in parentheses without
explanation. The second article is from Laylek p. 70. (W) on the subject
of love and fear, (L1). The third article comes from the same magazine,
pp. 64-5. (W), a specialist giving advice on the subject of very
sensitive children, (L1b). The fourth article is from Laylek, p. 70.
(M), and the subject deals with primitive Islamic practices in Saudi
Arabia, (L2). The last article in this group also comes from the same
magazine, (M) writing on the duties of men and women in life and
marriage, (L2b).
Group 2 includes articles of interest mostly for men. The chosen
articles here are from the sports section. In al-Sinarah p. 7 reports
(W) on kickboxing in Israel, (S1). (M) in the same newspaper, p. 6,
writes on the miserable results for Kfar Kana in the football
competition, (S2). (W) from Kull al-'arab, p. 33, writes on the
first Arab woman judge in basketball in Israel, (K1b). (27) Also the
last article in this group is from the same paper, p. 30. (M) writes on
negotiations in Jerusalem concerning unacceptable behaviour on the part
of the Jewish audience toward a visiting Arab football team, (K2b). (28)
Group 3 includes articles of assumed interest for both genders. The
first article is (M) in Banorama p. 18. The subject is the social value
of sending SMS, (B2). (W) writes in Kull al-'arab p. 29 on a letter
from a child in Gaza, (K1). On the same page in the same paper (M)
writes on the Arab propaganda effort to declare Jerusalem 'Arab
capital of culture', (K2). The next article is written by (W) from
'Arab al-Dakhil p. 13 on the subject of children's reactions
when watching TV reports from Gaza, (AD1). Also the following writer,
(M), writes in the same paper, p. 8, and writes, or rather rewrites, the
history of the city of Gaza, (AD2). (W) writing for Sawt al-'arabi
p. 9 has the next article on the subject of encouraging Gaza, (SalA1).
(M) in the same paper, p. 7, writes on the subject of demonstrations for
Gaza in the world, (SalA2). Finally, there are two articles chosen from
al-'Onwan al-ra 'isi. (W) writes on p. 26 on the memory that
comes after the ongoing conflict, (UR1), and (M) writes on the same page
on Palestinian culture in the year that passed, (UR2).
The results
The following three tables give the frequency in each group for
each individual publication. The last column gives the average frequency
in the group.
In order to make the results more comparable, the following table
includes the average frequency in all three groups.
If we then compare the average result between the genders in the
different groups, the following is found, where 'W' indicates
women and 'M' men (numbers indicate percentage, except last
row):
Analysis
The frequencies above reveal some variation among the groups as
well as within one gender. It is probable that this kind of
individuality is to be expected, as people are not robots, each having
their individual style and preference in writing. Also, in all
likelihood, this differentiation on an individual level would become
less significant on a group level with a larger amount of articles. The
average frequency takes out the extremes and in material ten times as
voluminous, internal variation would be less significant. Smaller
frequencies might also render differences in a larger amount of
material. Here only differences of about 5 and more are considered.
There indeed seems to be some variation between how women and men
write Arabic as well as variation depending on the gender of the
supposedly intended reader.
a) Sentence length/relation main and secondary clauses: Starting
with sentence length, based in this investigation on the number of
clauses
and the preference to use main clauses in relation to secondary
clauses, a very interesting piece of information is revealed in table 4.
In clauses intended mainly for men and mainly for women,
respectively, the total of main clauses is over 70 % (71.1 for women,
78.15 for men). This amounts to a difference of no less than 7 higher
frequency of main clauses in articles written for men. However, in
articles where the intended readers are both genders, less than 60 %
(59.33) of clauses are main clauses. Thus, the frequency of main clauses
is about 18 less in articles addressing both genders than in articles
addressed to men, and 11 less than in those addressed to women. It is to
be noted that this relation is broken several times depending on the
different kinds of main clauses that are registered in the table. Main
clauses without a verb seem to be a much higher frequency in articles
addressed to both genders (15.66), while the frequency is considerably
weaker, approximately half, in articles addressed to women (7.46) and
even more so in articles written for men (3.975).
While table 4 deals with the syntax, sentence length, word class
and particles from the angle of the gender of the reader, table 5 gives
us a more precise picture, taking up both the gender of the writers of
the articles as well as the gender of the intended reader. Therefore
table 5 has six columns, of which the first three are female writers in
each of the three groups and the following three are male writers in the
three groups. Again, the first group includes articles intended for
women, the second articles for men, and the third articles written for
both genders. The items under investigation are parallel to those in
tables 1-3 and 4; and they are in the same order.
When looking at the total of main clauses, in table 5, the highest
frequency in the use of these is when women write for men (as much
as 83). This is about 26 more than the lowest frequency that can be
found, namely in sentences written by men for both genders (only about
57). Three of the groups have frequencies of between 71 and 73.4.
Further, sentences written by women for both genders have a main clause
frequency of 62.5
Both genders (in tables 4 and 5) use passive voice with very low
frequency in all groups. Replicating the findings of previous studies in
other languages (from table 5), women in groups 1 and 3 tend to refrain
from writing out any visible subject of the verb. Most of these verbs
are written in the first person in the examined articles. (29) Thus, a
tendency in previous findings that women use the first person more often
than men is reconfirmed also in Arabic. (30)
Main clauses without any verb, on the other hand could possibly
indicate a difference only in group 2 (table 5), where women use more
than men do.
The situation is then reversed when it comes to secondary clauses.
There, in table 4, one finds no less than 40 in articles addressing both
genders, while those intended for men include only 22 and those written
for women, a somewhat higher 28. In the subcategories this tendency
seems to be confirmed. In table 5 both genders have many more secondary
clauses in articles intended for both genders, while men writing for men
and women, respectively, use less than a third secondary clauses; less
than a third of the clauses women use in articles addressing men are
secondary clauses, and, slightly less than 20 in articles addressing
women are secondary clauses.
Summary: In articles intended for both genders, where the writers
are both men and women, the frequency of main clauses is considerably
lower than in the articles for women. The highest frequency of main
clauses is found in articles intended for men, clearly so when men write
(82.95) and only slightly when women write. Secondary clauses are
considerably more numerous in articles intended for both genders (while
women use ten percent fewer than men do) as well as more in articles
intended for women. Secondary clauses are an indication both of larger
variation in the language as well as of sentence length. The frequency
of secondary clauses is of exact parallel opposition to what is found in
the main clauses. In contrast to the above main clauses, while the
highest frequency of secondary clauses is to be found in sentences
written by men in articles addressing both genders (45), the lowest is
in sentences written by women for men (17.55). In three other groups the
frequency varies between 26.5 and 28, and in the group of articles
written by women addressing both genders it stands at 36. What these
figures tell us is that women use fewer secondary clauses than men do
both when writing for men (17.55 of all the clauses to 26.6) and when
writing for both genders (36.8 in relation to 45.14). Only when writing
for women, do women use about the same amount or slightly more secondary
clauses in comparison to main clauses than men do. If we accept that
many secondary clauses are an indication of a more varied language and
of longer sentences, then women write these as much as men only when
writing for women.
b) Word order: Word order in the Arabic of this material is of
particular interest as the language of the majority population and the
dominant language in Israel, Hebrew, is mostly an SVO language. (31)
Also, the colloquial Arabic is arguably of SVO order. (32) Thus, under
the possible influence of both Hebrew and colloquial Arabic, a
preference for SVO order would be expected. However, other studies, like
that of Parkinson, on Arabic in newspapers show that neither SVO order
nor VSO order is clearly dominant in this kind (MSA of printed media) of
Arabic. (33)
In table 4, the preferred word order in main clauses is about the
same for both alternatives when the expected reader is a woman, slightly
higher (some 3) in favor of VS order when both genders are intended, and
noticeably higher (21.75/29.65) for VS order when the articles are
written for men. The opposite situation is, however, not found for
secondary clauses. Here, SV or VS order is about equal for the groups
with articles intended for men and women respectively. But in articles
intended for both genders, three out of four secondary clauses have SV
order.
Continuing with main clauses again, the following observations can
be made from the results in table 5: While women as well as men write
slightly more (2-3) VS order in articles intended for both genders, the
preference for SV order in main clauses is clear only when women write
for women. There the relation is 20.87 for SV to 6.3. Men writing
articles intended for women, on the other hand, favor VS order more
(more than double), and the same goes for articles by men writing for
men (7 more). Women writing for men, on the contrary, have a tendency to
use VS order instead. Continuing with the secondary clauses, both men
and women prefer SV order in a relation of two out of three in articles
written for both genders. Women writing for men also clearly favor SV
order, while in articles for women both genders tend to write about half
the secondary clauses in SV and half in VS order (more in favor of SV
when men write and less, when women write).
Summary: Women prefer SV order in main clauses in articles for
women, as well as in secondary clauses in articles written for men or
for both genders. Women write VS order in the remaining groups both for
main clauses and for secondary clauses only about 50 of the rime, and
with deviation from this rule of only a few percent. The exception is
when the expected reader is a man. Then women use VS order in main
clauses 7 more frequently. Thus, what is observable is that women prefer
SV order or give both word orders equal frequency, except when the
intended reader is a man. Men on the other hand seem to be in favor of a
more traditional word order of MSA, that is VS order. This is clear in
main clauses written for both women and men. In secondary clauses men
prefer SV order clearly only when the article is for both genders.
Otherwise SV order is slightly more frequent in articles for women and
slightly less in articles for men. What is clear from the above is
first, that women seem to favor SV order more than men, and, second,
that the gender of the reader does make a difference, as women write
more SV order both in main and secondary clauses when the reader is a
man. Men, third, appear to prefer a more traditional VS order of MSA
with the exception perhaps of secondary clauses.
c) Adjectives: Turning to adjectives, (table 4), the frequency of
clauses where adjectives are found in articles intended for male readers
is 15 higher than in articles intended for female readers, while
articles for both genders render the average of the other two groups
together (49.175 and 34.18), that is an average of 40.36. This is the
opposite result of previous studies in other languages, where both
genders used more adjectives when women were the intended readers. (34)
Women in all three groups (table 5) use fewer adjectives than men.
(35) In articles written for women and in those written for both
genders, women writers use about half as many clauses with adjectives as
do men (26.53 to 45.26 and 24.1 to 43.78 respectively), while women
writing articles intended for men use fewer, yet when writing for women
use the most clauses with adjectives, as do men (45.75 compared to
52.6).
Summary: Women use fewer clauses with adjectives than do men.
However, when the intended reader of the articles is male, the frequency
of clauses containing adjectives almost doubles. That means, clearly,
that the gender of the reader influences the frequency of adjectives.
d) Adverbs: In the other registered word class (of table 4),
adverbs, articles for men include, also, somewhat more clauses than is
the case for the other groups (approximately 6.5). For the other two
groups, the frequency is close to 11.5. In table 5 a comparison between
the genders in the three groups shows that while the frequency in
women's use of adverbs is clearly higher in articles for men, even
higher than when men write (19.5 to 14.25), and marginally higher than
when men write for women (12.13 to 11.15), women use only around half as
many adverbs as men in articles for both genders (7.8 to 13.64).
Summary: Adverbs are used in a higher percentage of clauses in
articles for men than in articles for women. If we compare with previous
research in other languages where women tend to use more intensive
adverbs, (36) we cannot be certain if this study is a replication or
not. In articles for men, clauses with adverbs are certainly more
frequent. However, 'intensity' is not considered here, as all
adverbs are counted as equal. That makes it problematic to compare.
Also, women writing articles for women show only a marginal difference.
e) Conjunction: As perhaps would be expected the conjunction wa- is
used considerably more often than its counterpart fa- in all groups
(table 4). Looking at table 5, in both genders and all groups the
frequency of wa- is also higher. Women writing for men and women writing
for both genders use fa- more frequently than do men in these groups
(17.25 in comparison to as little as 3.9 and 17.87 to 10.38). Only in
articles for women do men use relatively more fa- than do women (8.2 to
15.7).
Summary: Women as well as men use clearly more wa- than fa- as
conjunction. Women use fa- in articles intended for men and for both
genders with higher frequency. The only group where women use this
conjunction with less frequency is in articles for women. There, on the
other hand, men have a higher frequency of fa- than in the other groups.
The choice of this or the other conjunction is partly a question of
style, at least when both are possible grammatically. The use of fa-
with higher frequency could indicate an awareness of both grammar and
style. If so, women writers write accordingly except for in articles
intended for women, where men, on the contrary, have double as high a
frequency.
f) Particle of negation: The choice for negating the past between
the particles lam, which negates the imperfect in the jussive, or ma,
which negates the perfect, is a question of style. In all three groups,
lam is the preferred particle of negation, from 75 of the findings in
articles for women to 93.7 for both genders, and all the findings in
articles for men. Women writing for women use ma as much as 33, but
women choose only lam for the remaining groups. Men writing prefer ma in
10.5 of the cases only in articles intended for both genders, and in
none of the other groups.
Summary: The particle lam is used in more than 65 of the findings
irrespectively of the gender of the reader or the gender of the writer.
Since these two particles are used exchangeably this choice is solely a
matter of style. Varying one's choice of negation is varying in
style. This kind of variation is the choice of women writers only when
writing for women, and for men only when writing for both genders.
g) Ungrammaticalities: A brief look at the mistakes made in the
three groups (table 4) does not present any major difference. The number
of mistakes ranges between an average of 1 to 3.5 mistakes, and no
obvious conclusion can be made in this regard concerning a preference
for a certain grammatical or stylistic feature. Also, in table 5, only a
small increase is found in articles where either men or women write for
both genders.
Conclusion anal Final Comments
Women and men write different Arabic in the Israeli press. These
differences are observable in the frequency of main and secondary
clauses (i.e. in sentence length and in variation), in word order, in
the frequency of clauses containing adjectives, as well as those
containing adverbs. We see these differences in the frequency of verbs
without any visible noun, as well as in the choice of conjunction and
the choice of particle of negating the past. These variations in MSA are
due to the gender of the reader, as is the case with adjectives, where
women writers use markedly fewer adjectives than men do, except when
writing for men. But the variation is otherwise dependent on the gender
of the writer. This alternation is not between grammatical or
ungrammatical Arabic. Indeed, both genders write correct Arabic. Instead
it is (mostly) a question of choice, of style. We are perhaps not able
to draw certain conclusions as to the reasons behind the differences.
Assumptions as to why they exist are, however, possible to make. In the
following, a few thought-provoking suggestions will be presented.
Why are there differences in the use of Arabic?
First hypothesis: Men writing in the Israeli press use Arabic more
conservatively because of a stronger connection to the language of the
Koran and classical literature. Their MSA is closer to the language of
literature. Thus, they attempt to write a more archaic language. Indeed,
several of the writers in the examined material are even, politically,
Islamists, one or two are imams.
That men use a more traditional Arabic is observable in their
preference for VSO word order. Even women, who otherwise prefer SVO word
order, write VSO word order when writing for men. If men do have a more
conservative view of Arabic, this would suggest that they are more
resistant to influence both from the dominant surrounding language,
Hebrew, and, from the spoken colloquial, both of which arguably have SVO
word order. This goes for influence from other languages, such as
English, as well.
However, a few writers are Islamists or imams. And even if the
overwhelming majority of writers most likely are Muslims, this also
includes almost all the women. Thus, a religious argument will not
explain why Muslim men would write more conservatively than Muslim
women.
Second hypothesis: A more reasonable suggestion is that women seem
to be slightly more open to influence from either Hebrew or spoken
colloquial Arabic (or English at the University), and would expect male
readers to be less open to this kind of influence, which is why women
writers tend to write more VSO order for male readers. The opposite also
seems to apply. Men writing for women readers tend to use more SVO
order.
Men's preference for a more literary Arabic, would perhaps
also be an argument when it comes to the higher frequency of adjectives
and adverbs when men write, as well as when women write for men. A
further point are the indications of more secondary clauses, in the
language of men, i.e. longer and more complicated sentences when men
write. Women, on the whole, use fewer sentences and a less complicated
language. An oddity is that women use even fewer than their average when
the readers are men.
Women are perhaps more open to external influence. This is
reflected in a slightly less complicated language, with shorter
sentences, as well as fewer adjectives and adverbs. Women writers seem
to use a simpler language, that is concrete, with less ornament. Women
also use more verbs in the first person when writing. This could be an
indication of a stronger affiliation to themselves as individuals with
personal preferences that might be seen as separate from mainstream or
collective standings. If such a suggestion had credibility, it would
possibly mean, for one thing, that the academic experience of Arab
women, when experiencing the European or US-like secular university of
Israel, is somewhat different from that of Arab men. Or, to put it in
other words, perhaps it is a question of status identification, where
women view themselves as having a slightly weaker standing in the
traditional language and culture, than do men. The acceptance of more
stylistic elements from other languages could be a manifestation of
that.
The beauty of Arabic is arguably, among other features, found in
its extensive usage of adjectives and adverbs, more so than is the case
in, e.g. Hebrew. If male writers as well as male readers show a positive
relation to more adjectives and adverbs in written Arabic, as well as a
stronger preference for VSO word order, and, longer, more complex,
sentences, this could be interpreted as a more conservative attitude
towards Arabic among men. The most reasonable argument for a marginally
different approach among women is that they are more open to external
influence.
The above are but assumptions that would need further studies for
verification. Whatever the underlying reasons, this study has
established that there are indications for differences in written Arabic
depending both on the gender of the writer and of the reader.
Halvor Eifring
University of Oslo
References
Colley, A. et al. 'Style and Content in Emails and Letters to
Male and Female Friends', in Journal of Language and Social
Psychology, 23 (2004), pp. 369-378.
Dahlgren, S. O. Word Order in Arabic (Gothenburg 1996).
Fairclough, N. Language and Power (London 2001).
Fasold, R. W. Tense Marking in Black English: a Linguistic and
Social Analysis (Arlington 1972).
Goddard, A. and L. M. Patterson. Language and Gender (London 2000).
Grootaers, W. 'Quelques remarques concernant le langage des
femmes', in Orbis 1 (1952), 82-85.
Haas, A. 'Male and Female Spoken Language Differences',
in Psychological Bulletin 86 (1979), 616-626.
Haas, M. J. 'Men's and Women's Speech in
Koasati', in D. Hymes (ed.), Language in Culture and Society (New
York 1964).
Hellinger, M. 'Effecting Social Change through Group
Action', in C.
Kramarae, M. Schultz and W. O'Barr (eds.), Language and Power
(Los Angeles 1984), pp. 136-153.
Inoue, M. 'Echoes of Modernity: Nationalism and the Enigma of
"Women's Language" in Late Nineteenth Century
Japan', in B. S.
McElhinny, (ed.), Words, Worlds and Material Girls: Language,
Gender, Globalization (New York 2007), 157-204.
Jespersen, O. Language, Its Nature, Development and Origin (London
1922).
Key, M. R. Male/Female Language (New York 1975).
Labov, W. Sociolinguistic Patterns (Philadelphia 1972).
Lakoff, R. Language and Women's Place (New York 1975).
Lee, M. Y. 'The Married Women's Status and Role as
Reflected in Japanese: an Exploratory Sociolinguistic Study', in
Signs 1 (1976), 991-999.
Mehl, M. R. and J. W. Pennebaker, 'The Sounds of Social Life:
a Psychometric Analysis of Students' Daily Social Environments and
Natural Conversations', in Journal of Personality & Social
Psychology 84 (2003), pp. 857-870.
Miller, R. A. The Japanese Language (Chicago 1967).
Mills, S. Language and Sexism (New York 2008).
Moreau, N. B. 'Education, Ideology and Class/Sex
Identity', in C.
Kramarae, M. Schultz and W. O'Barr (eds.), Language and Power
(Los Angeles 1984), 43-61.
Muchnik, M. 'Language Differences between Men and Women in
Hebrew Journals' (Ramat-Gan 1992).
Mulac, A. et al. 'Empirical Support for the Gender-as-Culture
Hypothesis: an Intercultural Analysis of Male/Female Language
Differences', in Human Communication Research (2001), pp. 121-152.
Mulac, A. and T. L. Lundell, 'Effects of Gender-Linked
Language Differences in Adults' Written Discourse: Multivariate
Tests of Language Effects', in Language and Communication 14
(1994), pp. 299-309.
Newman, M. L. et al., 'Gender Differences in Language Use: an
Analysis of 14,000 Text Samples', in Discourse Processes 45 (2008).
Parkinson, D. 'VSO to SVO in Modern Standard Arabic: A Study
in Diglossia Syntax', in Al-Arabiyya 14 (1981), pp. 24-37.
Saint-Jacques, B. 'Sex, Dependency and Language', I La
Linguistique 9 (1973), pp. 89-96.
Sapir, E. Selected Writings in Language (Berkeley 1949).
Shibamoto, J. S. Japanese Women's Language (London 1985).
Silveira, J. 'Generic Masculine Words and Thinking', in
C. Kramarae, The Voices and Words of Women and Men (Oxford 1980),
165-178.
Smith, P. M. 'Sex Markers in Speech', in I. K. Sherer and
H. Giles, Social Markers in Speech (Cambridge 1979), 109-146.
Versteegh, K. Pidginization and Creolization: The Case of Arabic
(Amsterdam 1984).
Weatherall, A. Gender, Language and Discourse (London 2002).
Weil, Sh. 'Women and Language in Israel', in
International Journal of the Sociology of Language 41 (1983), 77-91.
Torkel Lindquist Uppsala
University, Sweden
(1) With the generous support of the Swedish Research Council
(Vetenskapsradet) and due to the hospitality of the Moshe Dayan Center
at Tel Aviv University I was able 2007-9 to conduct research on the
thrilling subject of contact induced grammatical change. I would like to
express my gratitude to several colleagues at Uppsala and Tel Aviv
University, foremost to Prof. Eyal Zisser, Prof. Withold Witakowski, Dr.
Tal Davidovich, Director Chaim Gal, Prof. Ilai Alon and doctoral student
Michael Barak.
(2) Other studies emphasized aspects such as stereotypes, as does
e.g. S. Mills, Language and Sexism (New York 2008), pp. 126 ff.
(3) The term 'gender' refers to socially expected
characteristics that are possibly different between men and women. The
term 'sex' on the other hand is wrong in this connection as it
indicates differences in a biological sense. See A. Goddard and L. M.
Patterson, Language and Gender (London 2000), p. 1.
(4) O. Jespersen, Language, Its Nature, Development and Origin
(London 1922), 237-254.
(5) E. Sapir, Selected Writings in Language (Berkeley 1949),
206-212.
(6) M. J. Haas, 'Men's and Women's Speech in
Koasati', in D. Hymes (ed.), Language in Culture and Society (New
York 1964), 228-233.
(7) For example 'word' + MOZI, 'word' + MOMO,
or before the word, as O + 'word'. J. S. Shibamoto, Japanese
Women's Language (London 1985), 29-169.
(8) They reduce syllables from nouns, for example MATU for MATUTAKE
(mushroom). Ibid, 29-169. See also W. Grootaers, 'Quelques
remarques concernant le langage des femmes', in Orbis 1 (1952),
82-85; R. A. Miller, The Japanese Language (Chicago 1967), 277, 283-290;
M. Y. Lee, 'The Married Women's Status and Role as Reflected
in Japanese: an Exploratory Sociolinguistic Study', in Signs 1
(1976), 991-999.
(9) B. Saint-Jacques, 'Sex, Dependency and Language', in
La Linguistique 9 (1973), pp. 89-96.
(10) M. Inoue, 'Echoes of Modernity: Nationalism and the
Enigma of "Women's Language" in Late Nineteenth Century
Japan', in B. S. McElhinny, (ed.), Words, Worlds and Material
Girls: Language, Gender, Globalization (New York 2007), 157204.
(11) W. Labov, Sociolinguistic Patterns (Philadelphia 1972),
243-244, 301-304; R. W. Fasold, Tense Marking in Black English: a
Linguistic and Social Analysis (Arlington 1972), 215-217; M. R. Key,
Male/Female Language (New York 1975); J. Silveira, 'Generic
Masculine Words and Thinking', in C. Kramarae, The Voices and Words
of Women and Men (Oxford 1980), 165-178; and M. Hellinger,
'Effecting Social Change through Group Action', in C.
Kramarae, M. Schultz and W. O'Barr (eds.), Language and Power (Los
Angeles 1984), pp. 136-153.
(12) N. B. Moreau, 'Education, Ideology and Class/Sex
Identity', in C. Kramarae, M. Schultz and W. O'Barr (eds.),
Language and Power (Los Angeles 1984), 43-61.
(13) P. M. Smith, 'Sex Markers in Speech', in I. K.
Sherer and H. Giles, Social Markers in Speech (Cambridge 1979), 109-146.
(14) N. Fairclough, Language and Power (London 2001).
(15) A. Colley et al., 'Style and Content in Emails and
Letters to Male and Female Friends', in Journal of Language and
Social Psychology, 23 (2004), pp. 369378.
(16) This subject was first introduced by R. Lakoff, Language and
Women's Place (New York 1975).
(17) A. Mulac and T. L. Lundell, 'Effects of Gender-Linked
Language Differences in Adults' Written Discourse: Multivariate
Tests of Language Effects', in Language and Communication 14
(1994), pp. 299-309. Women are found to use longer sentences, while men,
overall, use more words.
(18) A. Mulac et al., 'Empirical Support for the
Gender-as-Culture Hypothesis: an Intercultural Analysis of Male/Female
Language Differences', in Human Communication Research (2001), pp.
121-152. In this and other studies women are found using more intensive
adverbs and more conjunctions.
(19) A. Weatherall, Gender, Language and Discourse (London 2002).
(20) M. Muchnik, 'Language Differences between Men and Women
in Hebrew Journals' (Ramat-Gan 1992), 213-222, Ph.D. thesis in
Hebrew.
(21) Ibid. The presentation of a subject as 'interesting for
men' or 'interesting for women' is based on stereotypes
and as such controversial. Fields of interest only or mostly to men
would be sports, automotive, business, etc., while those of interest
mostly or solely to women would be articles on the home, family and
beauty. This is according to "topics of male" and "topics
of female" interest according to Haas and Weil respectively. A.
Haas, 'Male and Female Spoken Language Differences', in
Psychological Bulletin 86 (1979), 616-626; Sh. Weil, 'Women and
Language in Israel', in International Journal of the Sociology of
Language 41 (mi), 77-91.
(22) Examples of other such features are the frequency of the
Imperative, or the Jussive (apart from the one case above), preference
for using sa- or saw/a as a particle expressing future, or the use of
'a- or hal as interrogative marker. After reading through a larger
amount of material from which the articles were chosen, the frequency of
these seemed to be rather insignificant. Therefore they will not be
considered.
(23) This is due to the possibility of a correlation between
certain grammatical features and increased grammatical errors, and that
this would be different for men and women.
(24) 1. al-Salam is a Christian weekly distributed for free. The
edition of 2nd Jan. 2009 has only unsigned articles, with two
exceptions, both written by men. 2. Hadit al-nas is a weekly with no
defined political or religious affiliation. It is sold. The edition of
5th Dec. 2008 has ten signed articles of an appropriate size, two of
which are written by women. 3. Kull al-'arab is a weekly with no
defined political or religious affiliation. It is sold. The edition of
5th Dec. 2008 has a total of 19 articles with signatures. Of these,
three are written by women. 4. al-Ittihad is the Arabic version
published by the Israeli Communist Party. It is a weekly. The edition of
19--20th Dec. 2008 has 13 articles with signatures. One of the
signatures belongs to a woman. 5. Banorama is a weekly that is sold. It
has no particular affiliation in terms of politics or religion. The
edition of 5th Dec. 2008 has 20 signed articles, of which three are
written by women. 6. al-Akhbar is a weekly distributed for free. Its
political or religious leanings are not defined. The edition of 2nd Jan.
2009 has seven signed articles. The writers are all men. 7.
al-'Onwan al-ra isi is a weekly distributed for free. Its religious
and political direction is undefined. The edition of 2nd Jan. 2009 has
13 articles with signatures. Three are written by women. 8. al-Sinarah
is a weekly that is sold. Its politics and religious affiliation are
undefined. The edition of 2nd Jan. 2009 has 28 articles with signatures.
Two of these are written by women. 9. Sawi al-Jalil is a free weekly.
Its political or religious affiliations are undefined. The edition of
2nd Jan. 2009 has three signed articles, of which one is written by a
woman. 10. Saw/ al'arabl is a weekly distributed free of charge,
with no defined political or religious affiliation. The edition of 2nd
Jan. 2009 has seven articles. One of these is written by a woman. 11.
al-Markaz is a free weekly. Its political as well as religious
affiliation is undefined. The edition of 2nd Jan. 2009 has twelve signed
articles. Two are written by women. 12. 'Arab al-Dakhil is a weekly
distributed free of charge. No political or religious affiliation is
defined. The edition of 2nd Jan. 2009 has nine signed articles. Two are
written by women. 13. al-Fajr al-jadid is a weekly that is sold. No
political or religious affiliation is defined. The edition of 2nd Jan.
2009 has no signed articles. 14. Laylek of June 2009 is a weekly
magazine that is sold. It has no religious or political affiliation, and
its intended audience is women.
It is my opinion that the variation in time will have no relevant
effect on the results. When, however, it comes to the content, a rather
large number of articles deal with the then ongoing intensified conflict
between Israel and Hamas/the Gaza strip. This is naturally reflected in
an unusually large number of articles about Gaza.
(25) The unequal number in the groups reflects a lesser frequency
of articles intended mostly for men or women respectively.
(26) In order to simplify for the reader, a female writer is marked
as (W) and a male writer as (M).
(27) Even the name of the section indicates the intended audience:
riyadah wa-sabab (Sports and young men).
(28) That the articles are taken from the same newspaper is due to
the comparability in size between articles written by men and women.
Rather few articles are on the whole signed by women. This is
particularly so in the sports section.
(29) The frequency of verbs in the first person is close to 100 %.
This is not entered in the tables.
(30) Mehl and Pennebaker have found that women are more likely to
use the first person singular. M.R. Mehl and J. W. Pennebaker, 'The
Sounds of Social Life: a Psychometric Analysis of Students' Daily
Social Environments and Natural Conversations', in Journal of
Personality & Social Psychology 84 (2003), pp. 857-870.
(31) Albeit the order may be reversed frequently in the narrative
and in secondary clauses.
(32) This opinion is supported by among others Versteegh, while on
the other hand disputed, at least when it comes to the narrative, by
Dahlgren. S. O. Dahlgren, Word Order in Arabic (Gothenburg 1996); K.
Versteegh, Pidginization and Creolization: The Case of Arabic (Amsterdam
1984), 21, 79.
(33) D. Parkinson, 'VSO to SVO in Modern Standard Arabic: A
Study in Diglossia Syntax', in Al-Arabiyya 14 (1981), pp. 24-37.
(34) Muchnik, 'Differences', Conclusion.
(35) In this study all adverbs and adjectives are given the same
value. 'Intensity' or other characteristics are not
considered.
(36) M.L. Newman et al., 'Gender Differences in Language Use:
an Analysis of 14.000 Text Samples', in Discourse Processes 45
(2008), p. 230.
Table of frequency no 1: articles of interest mostly to women
(in percent of total)
Category: syntax B1 L1 L1b
Main clause; SV ... 18.4 13.2 31
Main clause; VS ... 9.2 5.3 4.4
Main clause; without 8.2 -- 12.4
verb
Main clause; without 39.8 52.6 16.8
noun
Main clause; passive 1 -- --
voice
Total main 76.6 71.1 64.6
clauses
Secondary clause; 7.1 -- 10.6
SV after 'inna or her
sisters
Secondary clause; 6.1 -- 2.7
SV after relative
pronoun
Secondary clause; 1 5.3 5.3
SV with hidden
relative pronoun
referring to
indefinite noun
Secondary clause; -- -- 1.8
VS where noun is
other than relative
pronoun
Secondary clause; in 5.1 23.7 15
the subjunctive
Total secondary 19.3 29 35.4
clauses
Total clauses 100 100 100
Category:
morphology and
word classes
Clauses with 20.4 21.1 38.1
adjectives
Clauses with adverbs 9.1 2.6 24.7
in the accusative or
written with
preposition
Frequency of wa in 88.9/11.1 100/- 86.5/
relation to fa- 13.5
Frequency of 100/- -/ 100/-
negation lam in 100
relation to ma
Number of 1 1 3
ungrammaticalities:
errors in agreement;
missing relative
pronouns ...
Category: syntax L2 L2b Av.
Main clause; SV ... 20.6 13.2 19.28
Main clause; VS ... 26.5 42.8 17.64
Main clause; without 8.8 7.9 7.46
verb
Main clause; without 11.8 11.8 26.56
noun
Main clause; passive -- 1.3 0.46
voice
Total main 67.7 78 71.6
clauses
Secondary clause; 8.8 1.3 5.56
SV after 'inna or her
sisters
Secondary clause; 8.8 3.9 4.3
SV after relative
pronoun
Secondary clause; 5.9 2 3.9
SV with hidden
relative pronoun
referring to
indefinite noun
Secondary clause; 5.9 1.3 1.8
VS where noun is
other than relative
pronoun
Secondary clause; in 2.9 14.5 12.24
the subjunctive
Total secondary 32.6 23 27.86
clauses
Total clauses 100 100 100
Category:
morphology and
word classes
Clauses with 67.6 23.7 34.18
adjectives
Clauses with adverbs 17.7 4.6 11.74
in the accusative or
written with
preposition
Frequency of wa in 87.5/ 81.1/18.9 88.8/
relation to fa- 12.5 11.2
Frequency of 100/- - 75/
negation lam in 25
relation to ma
Number of -- 3 1.6
ungrammaticalities:
errors in agreement;
missing relative
pronouns ...
Table of frequency no 2: articles of interest mostly to men
(in percent of total)
Category: syntax Sl S2 K1b
Main clause; SV ... 23.5 38.5 17.5
Main clause; VS ... 47.1 30.8 10.5
Main clause; without verb -- -- 14
Main clause; without noun 5.9 -- 29.8
Main clause; passive voice 17.6 3.8 --
Total main clauses 94.1 73.1 71.8
Secondary clause; SV after 'inna 5.9 -- 15.8
or her sisters
Secondary clause; SV after -- 7.7 7
relative pronoun
Secondary clause; SV with hidden -- 3.8 1.8
relative pronoun referring to
indefinite noun
Secondary clause; VS where noun -- 3.8 1.8
is other than relative pronoun
Secondary clause; in the -- 11.5 3.5
subjunctive
Total secondary clauses 5.9 26.8 29.2
Clauses with adjectives 52.9 73.1 38.6
Clauses with adverbs in the 29.4 11.5 10.5
accusative or with preposition
Total clauses 100 100 100
Frequency of wa in relation to 100/-- 100/-- 34.5/
fa- 65.5
Frequency of negation lam in -- 100/-- 100/--
relation to ma
Number of ungrammaticalities: 2 2 1
errors in agreement; missing
relative pronouns, etc.
Category: syntax K2b Av.
Main clause; SV ... 7.5 21.75
Main clause; VS ... 30.2 29.65
Main clause; without verb 1.9 3.975
Main clause; without noun 34 17.425
Main clause; passive voice -- 5.35
Total main clauses 73.6 78.15
Secondary clause; SV after 'inna 3.8 6.375
or her sisters
Secondary clause; SV after 7.5 5.55
relative pronoun
Secondary clause; SV with hidden -- 1.4
relative pronoun referring to
indefinite noun
Secondary clause; VS where noun 1.9 1.875
is other than relative pronoun
Secondary clause; in the 13.2 7.05
subjunctive
Total secondary clauses 26.4 22.075
Clauses with adjectives 32.1 49.175
Clauses with adverbs in the 17 17.1
accusative or with preposition
Total clauses 100 100
Frequency of wa in relation to 7.1/ 89.425/
fa- 92.2 10.4
Frequency of negation lam in 100/-- 100/--
relation to ma
Number of ungrammaticalities: 1 1.25
errors in agreement; missing
relative pronouns, etc.
Table of frequency no 3: articles of interest to both genders
(in percent of total)
Category: B2 K1 K2 AD1 AD2
syntax
Main clause; 30.6 3.1 8.4 13.7 11
SV...
Main clause; 17.6 4.1 13.3 11.4 30.1
VS...
Main clause; 7.6 32 25.3 9.1 16.2
without verb
Main clause; 5.9 7.2 8.4 15.4 2.6
without noun
Main clause; 1.8 2.1 -- 4.6 10.3
passive voice
Total main 64.5 48.5 55.4 54.2 70.2
clauses
Secondary 18.8 13.4 7.2 5.1 8.1
clause; SV after
'inna or her
sisters
Secondary 5.3 6.2 9.6 13.1 16.9
clause; SV after
relative pronoun
Secondary 2.4 24.7 9.6 3.4 3.3
clause; SV with
hidden relative
pronoun referring
to indefinite noun
Secondary 2.4 2.1 2.4 0.6 4.8
clause; VS where
noun is other
than relative
pronoun
Secondary 7.1 5.2 14.4 21.7 7.7
clause; in the
subjunctive
Total secondary 36 51.6 43.2 43.9 40.8
clauses
Clauses with 46.5 17.5 38.6 20 33.1
adjectives
Clauses with 22.4 7.2 2.4 8 15
adverbs in the
accusative or
written with
preposition
Total clauses 100 100 100 100 100
Frequency of wa 88.9/ 94.4/ 84.1/ 78.4/ 85.8/
in relation to fa 11.1 5.6 15.9 21.6 14.2
Frequency of 100/ 100/ -- 100/ 66.7/
negation lam in -- -- -- 33.3
relation to ma
Number of 5 -- -- 9 6
ungrammaticalities:
errors in
agreement;
missing relative
pronouns
Category: SaIA1 SaIA2 UR1 UR2 Av.
syntax
Main clause; 8.6 10.7 20 15.1 13.47
SV...
Main clause; 27.6 12.5 15.7 13.7 16.22
VS...
Main clause; 13.8 8.9 15.7 12.3 15.66
without verb
Main clause; 27.6 7.1 12.9 5.5 10.29
without noun
Main clause; 3.4 -- 1.4 8.2 3.53
passive voice
Total main 81 39.2 66.2 54.8 59.33
clauses
Secondary 3.4 19.6 1.4 8.2 9.47
clause; SV after
'inna or her
sisters
Secondary -- 28.6 5.7 16.4 11.31
clause; SV after
relative pronoun
Secondary 1.7 7.1 11.4 12.3 8.43
clause; SV with
hidden relative
pronoun referring
to indefinite noun
Secondary -- 1.8 -- -- 1.57
clause; VS where
noun is other
than relative
pronoun
Secondary 13.8 3.6 14.7 8.2 10.71
clause; in the
subjunctive
Total secondary 18.9 60.6 29.9 45.1 41.11
clauses
Clauses with 15.5 73.2 61.4 57.5 40.36
adjectives
Clauses with 1.7 16.1 14.3 12.3 11.044
adverbs in the
accusative or
written with
preposition
Total clauses 100 100 100 100 100
Frequency of wa 76.5/ 89.3/ 79.2/ 100/ 86.29/
in relation to fa 23.5 10.7 20.8 -- 13.71
Frequency of 100/ 85.7 100/ 100/ 93.7/
negation lam in -- 14.3 -- -- 6.3
relation to ma
Number of 1 2 6 2 3.444
ungrammaticalities:
errors in
agreement;
missing relative
pronouns
Table of frequency no 4: comparison of average results of every
group (in percent of total)
Category: syntax For For For both
women men genders
Main clause; SV ... 19.28 21.75 13.47
Main clause; VS ... 17.64 29.65 16.22
Main clause; without verb 7.46 3.975 15.66
Main clause; without noun 26.56 17.425 10.29
Main clause; passive voice 0.46 5.35 3.53
Total main clauses 71.6 78.15 59.33
Secondary clause; SV after 'inna or 5.56 6.375 9.47
her sisters
Secondary clause; SV after relative 4.3 5.55 11.31
pronoun
Secondary clause; SV with hidden 3.9 1.4 8.43
relative pronoun referring to
indefinite noun
Secondary clause; VS where noun is 1.8 1.875 1.57
other than relative pronoun
Secondary clause; in the subjunctive 12.24 7.05 10.71
Total secondary clauses 27.86 22,075 41.11
Clauses with adjectives 34.18 49.175 40.36
Clauses with adverbs in the accusative 11.74 17.1 11.044
or with preposition
Total clauses 100 100 100
Frequency of wa in relation to fa- 88,8/ 89.425/ 86.29/
11.2 10.4 13.71
Frequency of negation lam in relation 75/ 100/- 93.7/
to ma 25 6.3
Number of ungrammaticalities: 1.6 1.25 3.444
errors in agreement; missing relative
pronouns.etc.
Table of frequency no 5: comparison of average results within
each gender
Category: syntax Wgr1 Wgr2 Wgr3
Main clause; SV ... 20.87 20.5 11.35
Main clause; VS ... 6.3 28.8 14.7
Main clause; without 6.87 7 17.65
verb
Main clause; without 36.6 17.85 15.76
noun
Main clause; passive 0.3 8.8 2.88
voice
Total main clauses 70.77 82.95 62.48
Secondary clause; SV 5.9 10.85 5.83
after 'inna or her sisters
Secondary clause; SV 2.93 3.5 6.25
after relative pronoun
Secondary clause; SV 3.87 0.9 10.3
with hidden relative
pronoun referring to
indefinite noun
Secondary clause; VS 0.6 0.9 0.68
where noun is other
than relative pronoun
Secondary clause; in the 14.6 1.75 13.85
subjunctive
Total secondary 27.9 17.55 36.08
clauses
Clauses with adjectives 26.53 45.75 24.1
Clauses with adverbs in 12.13 19.95 7.8
the accusative or with
preposition
Total clauses 100 100 100
Frequency of wa in 91.8/ 82.75/ 82.13/
relation to fa 8.2 17.25 17.87
Frequency of negation 66.67/ 100/ 100/
lam in relation to ma 33.33 -- --
Number of 1.3 1.5 4
ungrammaticalities:
errors in agreement,
missing relative
pronouns, etc.
Category: syntax Mgr1 Mgr2 Mgr3
Main clause; SV ... 16.9 23 15.6
Main clause; VS ... 34.65 30.5 17.44
Main clause; without 8.35 0.95 14.6
verb
Main clause; without 11.8 22 5.9
noun
Main clause; passive 0.88 1.9 4.06
voice
Total main clauses 72.85 73.35 56.82
Secondary clause; SV 5.5 1.9 12.34
after 'inna or her sisters
Secondary clause; SV 6.35 7.6 15.36
after relative pronoun
Secondary clause; SV 3.95 1.9 6.94
with hidden relative
pronoun referring to
indefinite noun
Secondary clause; VS 3.6 2.85 2.28
where noun is other
than relative pronoun
Secondary clause; in the 8.7 12.35 8.2
subjunctive
Total secondary 27.8 26.6 45.14
clauses
Clauses with adjectives 45.65 52.6 43.78
Clauses with adverbs in 11.15 14.25 13.64
the accusative or with
preposition
Total clauses 100 100 100
Frequency of wa in 84.3/ 96.1/ 89.62/
relation to fa 15.7 3.9 10.38
Frequency of negation 100/ 100/ 89.5/
lam in relation to ma -- -- 10.5
Number of 2.3 1.5 3
ungrammaticalities:
errors in agreement,
missing relative
pronouns, etc.
