# Modern Standard Arabic (MSA)



## Josh_

العربية المعاصرة is the common way (that I'm aware of) to say MSA in Arabic. If I wanted to say colloqiual I would use العامية .


----------



## elroy

I call MSA العربية الفصحى. المعاصرة just means "contemporary" so I was unsure as to what you meant.


----------



## Josh_

I agree that's the other way and I do use that, but, out of curiosity, how do you differentiate between MSA and classical Arabic?  This is another one of those questions that has perplexed me.

For what its worth, العربية المعاصرة appears 172,000 times on Google.


----------



## MarcB

Hi Josh,
I find that most speakers who are not academics do not differentiate between the two. I only hear MSA in English by people who study or teach it. I am waiting for other thoughts.


----------



## elroy

Josh Adkins said:


> I agree that's the other way and I do use that, but, out of curiosity, how do you differentiate between MSA and classical Arabic? This is another one of those questions that has perplexed me.


 We don't; they're not different enough to require different terms.  If it were absolutely necessary to state that something were written in "classical Arabic" as opposed to "modern standard Arabic" that can be taken care of by other descriptors.

To me, العربية الفصحى is not "the other way" - it is _the_ way.  I have never heard anyone refer to MSA as العربية المعاصرة.


> For what its worth, العربية المعاصرة appears 172,000 times on Google.


 Yes, and in most of them the words are adjectives describing some noun: السياسة العربية المعاصرة, for example.  I did see some referring to the language, but certainly not enough to indicate that العربية المعاصرة is the "common way" to refer to MSA.  It is at most a less common alternative.


----------



## Josh_

I also have seen at least two textbooks (one which I own) that uses العربية المعاصرة along with the English equivalent, Modern Standard Arabic.  Both written by native speakers.

Marc brings up an interesting point, though, maybe no one really differentiates, or doesn't feel the need to, except academics.  Yes, they don't differ much, but they do differ enough to have their own classification (in my opinion, that is).  I have read medieval texts (for this class I'm in) that are damn near incomprehensible to me, but when retold in MSA, I can understand them.  I've enen had to write a few papers rewriting an old text with modern equivalents.  You also told me once that the difference between them can be likened to modern English and King James English or modern German and Goethe's German. 

Who knows,  I'll do some more research and get back.


----------



## elroy

Yes, it can - I'm just saying they're not different enough to require two different official terms.  "King James" and "Goethe" are also just descriptors, if you see what I mean.  In other words, it's all الفصحى but you can specify that further if you wish. 

As for المعاصرة - I did not contest its validity, but it is not the "common way."  This I am sure of.  If you ask most Arab speakers how to say MSA in Arabic they will say الفصحى.  Many will be unfamiliar with المعاصرة as a reference to MSA because as I mentioned above the common meaning of that word is "contemporary."  I would spontaneously understand العربية المعاصرة to mean "contemporary Arabic" - whether MSA or colloquial.


----------



## Josh_

Ok, I spoke to my professor and here's what I found out.   Of course, العربية الفصحى is correct for both and to native speakers there is no difference (and until I discovered the usage of the other terms this what I used for both exclusively).  But العربية المعاصرة is also correct (and used only to mean MSA, not colloquial), especially in non-native and/or academic circles.  My professor explained that العربية المعاصرة (and also العربية الحديثة ) was coined to differentiate modern Arabic from the classical form more for non-native Arabic learners than for natives.  So, from a non-native point of view, and non-native learning point of view, such as that found in Arabic as a second language teaching in American universities, it is a common way (but, of course, not the only one).  I can attest to this from my own experience learning Arabic in an American university in which I have heard the terms frequently.  Likewise, it is not common in Arab universites in the Middle East, and indeed, العربية الفصحى  is only used.

So my suggestion, to all, is to know and be aware of the the usage of the other terms (you don't have to use them, of course) when you are speaking to or trying to help a non-native speaker because it may come up some time. 

I think we tend to forget (myself included as evidenced by recent threads) that there are different learning styles among people raised in different parts of the world, and namely among learning a language as native and as a non-native.  Those who learn Arabic from the get-go learn Arabic from Arabic, and so the approach is Arabic.  Those who grow up with English as a native language learn Arabic later in life, and thus the approach to learning it is obviously different as English is used as the point of departure.  Things that may seems self evident from the native point of view may not be so to the non-native, and vise versa.   So to say one is wrong, or less correct, may be jumping the gun.  We always need to step back and look at why something is done and why one person sees it this way rather than another, instead of summarily calling it wrong, inaccuarate, not common, whatever.  This does nothing but hinder the learning process.  Understanding how a non-native learns the second language will also help the native in helping the learner, as the native will understand where the non-native is coming from. I imagine that's the purpose of pedagogy classes.

Ok, I'll jump off my soapbox, now.


----------



## MarcB

Josh,
I asked some friends about your suggestions, it seems like you said, they are only for non-Arabs. in French I also hear l'arabe classique but people studying Arabic say l'arabe  littéraire. In English many people say formal or written Arabic. 
So it is safe to say that no distinction is made in Arabic by the majority of people.after all MSA is in fact classical Arabic with updates made for the modern era.


----------



## Josh_

Marc,

I said that they were coined for and used more among non-native speakers than native speakers, not that they are only for non-native speakers, and that there is no other term, or no other way of thinking about it.  I tend not to state things in absolutes as I do not have absolute knowledge.

You should know that I am not arguing how many people make a distinction, but I will say that I whole heartily agree with you that the majority of people probably do not make a distinction, because the majority of people do not study Arabic in depth or to the graduate level, and there is no need to make a distincton. But I'd bet you that among Arabic professors/language specialists there is a distinction, at least among professors here in the US (who are mosly native Arabic speakers, by the way), and who knows, maybe among Arabic/linguisic professors in Arab countries who want to discuss all the facets of their language.  And while its ok not to make a distinction, I do.

My professor also talked about distinction being made among Arabs by referring to  العربية في وسائل العلام which is different than that found in the Quran.  

But if there is no distinction why do we say MSA (which is by far the most used term here on the forum) instead of just Arabic or formal (written) Arabic?  We couldn't use that term to describe the Quran.  As elroy was saying they are descriptors used to break define the various facets of "Arabic."  So think of it that way.  And if one doesn't want to use those descriptors, he/she doesn't have to.  Or think of it this way: العربية المعاصرة is the Arabic translation of the English phrase (unrelated to any Arabic terminology) "modern standard Arabic," which is an English language coinage used to describe the modern version of Arabic.

Anyway, it's not worth arguing about. That a distinction can be made just represents my opinion.  Other opinions are equally valid.   Like I said, one should just be aware of the terms, because the fact of the matter is that they do exist and might possibly be encountered.


----------



## MarcB

Josh,
I may not have been clear but you are right for the study of the language. My point was simply that the terms apear to be used among scholars like yourself.  I am sure once MSA was used and accepted here it became the pefered form since many English speaking people are comfortable with it.


----------



## elroy

"MSA" is used here when we are referring to *Modern* Standard Arabic (which is most of the time).  If it were just SA it could apply equally to Qur'anic Arabic.

Nobody ever claimed (at least I didn't) that MSA and "classical Arabic" were identical.  All I said was that in the Arab world no distinction is normally made - and that _the_ common term (I do not consider this an absolutist statement) is العربية الفصحى for all varieties of standard Arabic (after all, one could argue that even "classical Arabic" is not a sufficient term to describe all the different varieties of "non-modern" standard Arabic).  This is the word used by the overwhelming majority of Arabs, which says nothing about the validity or usefulness of العربية المعاصرة.

That said, I think some of us have been talking past each other.  Aren't we all in agreement that الفصحى is more common, and that المعاصرة is more of an arcane/pedagogical term used by a relatively small percentage of Arabic-speaking people (which includes both natives and non-natives)?


----------



## Josh_

elroy said:


> Aren't we all in agreement that الفصحى is more common


Yes.


> , and that المعاصرة is more of an arcane/pedagogical term used by a relatively small percentage of Arabic-speaking people (which includes both natives and non-natives)?


No, it is not arcane (that makes it sound cryptic), unless you call English speaking learners of Arabic in universities an arcane society. It is used by students (first year and graduate alike) to mean MSA as opposed to classical. I am talking from experience here, not just something I've heard. And as I said above, it is the title of at least two textbooks on MSA. When I said you may encounter it from a learner, I was talking more about those first and second year students who may be requesting help, not a graduate student/professor who would most likely be aware of the word most used among Arabs.

I apologize for any misunderstandings and thanks for the compliment, Marc, although I can hardly call myself a scholar.


----------



## elroy

In the interest of decreasing "talking past each other"... 

I said,


> arcane/*pedagogical*


The American Heritage Dictionary says,


> Known or understood by only a few: _arcane economic theories._


 I too apologize for any misunderstandings!


----------



## mansio

We already had a discussion about that topic a few months ago.

In university libraries, in the language department, you have a grammar of Classical Arabic sitting next to a grammar of MSA. 

On fundamentalist Muslim forums MSA is an invention of the West and does not exist.

I entirely agree with MarcB: "MSA is in fact classical Arabic with updates made for the modern era."


----------



## Josh_

mansio said:


> In university libraries, in the language department, you have a grammar of Classical Arabic sitting next to a grammar of MSA.


Good point, I didn't even think of mentioning that.  I have seen (western) grammars dedicated to Classical Arabic, and other dedicated to MSA.  Although, I doubt they differ too much.


> On fundamentalist Muslim forums MSA is an invention of the West and does not exist.


I agree that it was an coinage of the West in order for westerners to make sense out of the language.


> I entirely agree with MarcB: "MSA is in fact classical Arabic with updates made for the modern era."


Languages are dynamic and evolutionary and do change over time. 
On a related note:  I have often noted how over Arabic's history, from the advent of Islam, it has remained largely the same and has changed very little, comparing it to the changes that other languages have undergone, which would seem completely foreign to a modern speaker.  This is probably a good argument in favor of the idea that there is really no distinction.


----------



## mansio

Josh Adkins

It is really astonishing how (very) little Classical Arabic has changed along the centuries.

But actually Arabic has changed a lot like any other language. People do not use Classical Arabic at home and on the street.


----------



## cherine

mansio said:


> But actually Arabic has changed a lot like any other language. People do not use Classical Arabic at home and on the street.


Yes Mansio, this is true: People don't use Classical Arabic at home. But the فصحى is the same, its grammar has not changed a bit -at least to my knowledge- and the changes known by the language were in the vocabulary : new words were "created", or coined, others were borrowed, others become obsolete.

So, as we all seem to agree, MSA is an expression made by Western scholars, not known to all Arabic native (I myself have only learned it from this forum)  When we, natives, want to differentiate between *S*tandard *A*rabic and colloquial Arabic we say الفصحى والعامية because, to us, fus7a is the classical Arabic, the written or formal form of the language. If it changed from the old Arabic, in terms of vocabulary, it remains fus7a for us.


----------



## linguist786

So what if you want to differentiate between Classical Arabic and MSA?

Have you ever come across a situation where you have to differentiate between the two?


----------



## cherine

No, never. Unless when talking about literature, and in this case we attribute the texts to their periods; eg. الشعر العباسي، الشعر الأموي، الشعر الجاهلي , modern poetry is -of course- الشعر الحديث


----------



## suma

It's a confusing mess to the non-specialist.
to date I've heard the following:

Modern Standard Arabic
Classical Arabic
Colloquial Arabic
Media Arabic
Literary Arabic
Dialect Arabic
Quranic Arabic
Medieval Arabic
Contemporary Arabic
Gulf, Egyptian, Moroccan, Syrian, Levantine, Arabic, ect.

makes entry level student really scratch his/her head


----------



## elroy

mansio said:


> But actually Arabic has changed a lot like any other language. People do not use Classical Arabic at home and on the street.


 I agree 100% with Cherine (i.e. my experience overlaps with hers) - but I just wanted to make note of the fact that what you just said applies to MSA as well.


----------



## jmt356

[Moderator's Note: Merged with a previous thread]
Modern Standard Arabic
Suggestion:
اللغة العربية العياري الحديثة

I believe اللغة العربية الفصحى is classical Arabic (_i.e._, Qur'anic Arabic), not modern standard Arabic.


----------



## Linolenic

I think اللغة العربية المعيارية الحديثة is correct..
However, this expression is not commonly used!


----------



## fdb

I would maintain that there is no such thing as Modern “Standard” Arabic. There is no standard. The written language is different in every country, in particular with regards to vocabulary.


----------



## ahmedcowon

The written language is the same in all the Arab countries. The language written in Morocco is the same as the language written in Iraq and so on.

the common translation for "Standard" is "قياسي"
العربية القياسية الحديثة but we always use the word الفصحى to refer to MSA


----------



## fdb

The difference between the written Arabic of Morocco and the written Arabic of Iraq is at least as great as that between written English in Britain and the US. These are both “the same language”, of course, but they follow two different regional norms.


----------



## tounsi51

the spoken Arabic is different not the written because the written follows grammatical rules, an Egyptian can read a Tunisian Arabic newspaper without any difficulties and a Lebanese can read any Gulf Arabic newspaper


----------



## fdb

tounsi51 said:


> an Egyptian can read a Tunisian Arabic newspaper without any difficulties and a Lebanese can read any Gulf Arabic newspaper



Has anyone on here actually claimed otherwise?


----------



## إسكندراني

There are in fact several standards of literary Arabic, and the standards of MSA are quite comparable to English and US standard English - many dialects are also comparable to English dialects (in fact, established English dialects are often sparsely covered by academics just as in Arab countries )


----------

