Arabic Instruction in France: Pedagogy or Politics?1

According to the consensus of language scholars, language cannot be meaningfully studied in isolation from context and culture. In France, however, the opposite is true, with French teachers of Arabic addressing what seems to be an unsolvable issue: how to teach secular Arabic, how to teach Arabic without directly dealing with Islam. Considering the importance of culture in the teaching of language, such an approach poses serious pedagogical problems. In essence, the French approach to teaching Arabic seeks to separate Islam from the Arabic language when these two elements form the inseparable core of Arabic-Islamic identity.

With the advent of Islam in the 7th century, the Arabic language and culture underwent a radical and revolutionary transformation. By the end of Muhammad’s prophethood in 632 C.A., every tribe in the Arabian Peninsula had rejected polytheism, embraced monotheism, and placed the Qur’an, the holy book of Islam, at the core of the community of believers. The Qur’an became the basis of religion, law, jurisprudence, education and language. Being the first book ever published in the Arabic language, the Qur’an established the standard of classical Arabic, the guide to good grammar, the path of eloquence, the source of style and the lifeblood of the lexicon, exerting “a unique influence on the history of the Arabic language and literature” (Nicholson Xxiii).

A linguistic document of incomparable importance, “[i]t was viewed as a source of grammatical and lexicographical information,” “[i]ts stylistic inimitability notwithstanding, it even came to be treated as a standard for theories of literary criticism” (Rosenthal 321). As a literary monument, “the Koran…stands by itself, a production unique in Arabic literature, having neither forerunners nor successors in its own idiom” (Gibb 36). Unsurpassed in its rhetorical richness, even non-Muslim Orientalists have described the Qur’an as miraculous. Hottinger admits that when “[c]onsidered from the point of view of its Arabic eloquence, the Koran is indeed a miracle” (24). In terms of its overwhelming impact, Nasr notes that “there is…no single book that is as influential in any religion as the Qur’an is in Islam.” Thanks to the Qur’an, the success of Muhammad’s mission, and the spread of Islam under the “Orthodox” Caliphs, the Arabic language became the sacred language of the entire Muslim world. “Due to this single book,” explains Bishai, “Arabic rose from almost complete insignificance to be the holy tongue of the second largest religious community in the world” (92). The language of the Qur’an is held in such high regard that many Muslims call it kalam Allah, the language of Allah. According to Jacques Berque, “[t]he Arabic language scarcely belongs to the world of men; rather, it seems to be lent to them” (190). As a holy language, directly dispensing God’s word and law, this classical language is invested with supplementary levels and layers of implicature not always evident to the outside observer.

While Greek and Latin were infused with a new vocabulary as a result of the rise of Christianity, the saturation of spirituality into the Arabic language which took place via the Qur’an and the Sunnah with the arrival of Islam may be unparalleled in human and linguistic history. As a result, the Arabic language has become a reservoir of rich and varied idiomatic expressions invoking the name of Allah, including insha’ Allah [God willing], alhamdulillah [Praise be to God], subhana Allah [Glory be to God], masha Allah [It is the will of God], baraka Allahu fik [May God bless you], jazaka Allah khayr [May God reward you], fi amanillah [Go with God] and many more. These idioms, which number in the hundreds or even thousands, are collectively known as “the Allah Lexicon,” a feature unique to Arabic and a reflection of the Allah-centricity of the Arabic language, culture and civilization.

In the Arabic Islamic world, both the Arabic language and the Islamic religion are often viewed as inseparable parts of the same Arab Muslim identity. In the words of ‘Abdo A. Elkholy “The Arabic language is an inseparable part of Islam” (qtd. in Turner Medhi 109). As Desmond Stewart explains, “[t]he Arabic language is more than the unifying bond of the Arab world; it also shapes and molds that world” (14). Since Arabic is the language of the Qur’an and Muhammad, the Messenger of God, “it has an even greater effect on its speakers than other languages have on their speakers” (14). Speakers of Arabic and those who read it via their devotion to the Qur’an recognize the language as directly dispensing Allah’s word and law, as well as the words of the earliest disciples of those pronouncements.

Through the Allah Lexicon, those who are directly connected to Arabic have absorbed a repertoire of divine sentiment into their daily speech, assigning Allah’s influence over every area of their lives. The array of items within the Allah Lexicon demonstrates this component of identity as it is exhibited both by elective and affective elements of lifestyle. As Joshua Fishman has explained, Arabic is a “holy language” in the sense that it cannot be separated from the religion that arose within its use (11). This tie, between Arabic and Islam, has not gone unnoticed. In fact, it has been readily understood by those who seek to undermine it, be they the Catholic kings in Spain, the colonialists and imperialists in the Arabic world, secular leaders like Kemal Attaturk in Turkey and the Shah of Iran, as well as French Orientalists like Paul Balta and Linda Hamoud who, despite the pervasive presence of God and religion in the Arabic language, seek to create a “secular Arabic.”

With the fall of Granada in 1492, the “Muslim Question,” needed to be addressed. What was to be done with the millions of Muslims in Spain? The answer came quickly: forced conversion to Catholicism through the destruction of everything related to the Islamic identity. Among the prohibitions enacted were bans on Islamic dress, ritual baths, prayers and fasting, the pilgrimage to Mecca, and paying zakah. At the fore, however, was the prohibition to either speak or write Arabic, for which the penalties were severe: “thirty days in prison in chains for the first offense, double the sentence for the second offense, and for the third offense men were given a hundred lashes and four years in the galleys while women and youths under seventeen were given four years in prison” (Thomson 295).

The persecution of cryptic Muslims was so severe that “parents could not even afford to say Allah in the presence of young children” (Thomson 284). Children were kept ignorant of Islam at least until the age of reason for fear that a childish indiscretion might betray the whole family (284). Severed from Arabic, the secret Muslims were cut off from the Qur’an. While they lost their language, the Moriscos retained the Arabic script for writing in Spanish, a mark of the religious significance of the script and their determination to affirm their cultural identity as Muslims (López-Morillas 17). With time, however, the knowledge of the Arabic script was also lost. The only thing that remained in their hearts was a silent affirmation of La ilaha illa Allah, Muhammadun Rasul Allah, without knowing experientially the meaning of what they secretly believed (Thomson 285). Due to the inability to practice the beliefs that they hid, the knowledge of Islam among these secret Muslims became severely limited, facilitating their gradual assimilation into Catholicism and the eventual elimination of Islam in Spain.

This same desire to eliminate Islam through the elimination of Arabic was demonstrated by Western powers when they colonized the Arabic Islamic world. According to Darwish al-Jundi, “The imperialists…were aware of the influence of the Arabic language…They fought it and tried to replace it with their own languages. They also attempted to develop colloquial and regional dialects, hoping thereby to stamp out classical Arabic” (Laffin 67-68). In most Arabic-speaking countries, some secularized politicians or writers have advocated converting the regional dialect into the official language and relegating classical Arabic to ruin. In every case, this has failed, due in large part to a profound Arabic-Islamic identity.

In non-Arabic-speaking countries, where the bond to the Qur’an was limited to similarities in script and language differences made access to its significance more difficult, efforts to further distance Muslims from their scripture have been more successful. In Turkey, for example, Kemal Atatürk eliminated the Arabic alphabet and replaced it with a Latin-based one, effectively ensuring that future generations of Turks would not be able to read the Qur’an in its original Arabic without the substantial effort required to learn the script.

In Iran, the Shah commenced a campaign to “purge” the Persian language from Arabic loan-words and planned to replace the Persian alphabet, of Arabic origin, with the Latin one. The attempt to purify the Persian language of Arabic loan-words and replace the Arabic-based Persian alphabet with the Latin one was part of the Shah’s “white revolution.” The Shah may have been inspired by earlier efforts by Ahmad Kasravi who attempted to promote a “Pure Persian,” replacing words of Arabic origin with others he invented (Mutahhari, Tabataba’i, Khumayni 192).

The importance of the Arabic script, however, extends far beyond the mere representation of a given set of sounds by a particular set of letters (López-Morillas 18). Whether it’s Morisco Spanish, Persian, Ottoman Turkish or Urdu, the “use of the Arabic alphabet brings with it a considerable degree of Arabization and Islamicization of the original languages” (18). If attempts have been made to undermine Islam by eliminating the Arabic alphabet, French Orientalists like Paul Balta and Linda Hamoud are now attempting to undermine Islam through the creation of a “secular Arabic,” devoid of its essential religious expressions.

According to Paul Balta, the famous French Orientalist of Egyptian origin, “teaching Arabic does not go against secularism any more than learning Latin would make one a Christian fundamentalist” (123). While he admits that “Islam is an unavoidable element in learning this language” he insists that “it is possible to deal with it in secular manner” (123). For Balta, the Arabic instructor must be to the Imam what the secular school teacher was to the priest in the 19th century France (123). He warns that “If public schools do not offer the possibility of learning Arabic, parents turn to associations, often of religious inspiration, which are even more difficult to control” (123). In his view, when Muslim youth feel that the system seeks to take away their culture, “they become guilt ridden and radicalize themselves” (122). Peter Manderville echoes this view, explaining that

[t]here is a point beyond which discrimination and rejection by the majority society results not in Muslims’ denial of their religion, but rather in its affirmation. Rejected and unwanted, they turn to that which sets them apart as a form of cultural self-assertion and a basis of identity. Islam also becomes a form of self-defense and a source of solidarity against a hostile dominant culture. (22)

As a result, Balta greatly encourages the French government to provide Arabic language instruction at all levels, from elementary school to university. In doing so, however, “Arabic must not be considered as a religious language” (123). He feels that if the teaching of Arabic was valued as part of the national educational system, “it could be a powerful instrument encouraging secularism and integration (123). He argues that if the state feigns support for the Islamic culture of the students, they would not feel the need to use religious symbols like the hijab to express their differences. Not only should Arabic be a means of Muslim control in France, Balta wishes to export it abroad. As he explains,

Is it not in the interest of France to provide Arabic instructors to black African countries which are in need of them? Is it not better than letting them recruit instructors from abroad who are often mediocre and influenced by the fundamentalist ideology? The approach of the French School is also a means of forging spirits. (119)

Balta does not hide “the French Solution” to “the Muslim Problem.” When asked whether a secular Islam will be born in Western Europe, he explains that a new generation of secular Muslim intellectuals can serve as an example and “prepare the post-Islamist era” (329). That’s like teaching Spanish to prepare the “post-Hispanic” or the “post-Catholic era.” According to this plan, nothing would stop Muslims from practicing their religion within the confines of secular republicanism (330). At the same time, however, nothing should prevent them from ceasing to believe or to change their beliefs (330). In other words, this is the seizure of Arabic language instruction for the purpose of promoting secularization. This sounds like something straight out of 1936 Soviet Constitution which simultaneously recognized “freedom of religious worship and freedom of antireligious propaganda” for all citizens. According to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, however, freedom of religion is not acquired. It is an inherent, innate, and inalienable right.

Following in the footsteps of Paul Balta, Linda Hamoud’s article, “Télévision et religion en cours d’arabe,” provides further insights into the French attempt to subvert Islam through Arabic language instruction. Hamoud readily admits that “there is a real problem once one speaks of religion in an Arabic language class” (67). The problem with teaching Arabic, she notes, is that it arouses interest in Islam. As she explains,

The problem revolves around the fact that from sixth grade and up the questions of students concerning the Muslim religion made to the Arabic teacher are frequent and persistent. In the context of a republican secular school system, which finds itself in direct competition with the Arabic language instruction provided by mosques, the opinions of the teacher regarding religious subjects comes into direct conflict with the teachings of the Imam. In fact, he has a natural authority on these types of subjects and, as a result, Arabic instructors find themselves unprepared to respond to students’ questions.

The solution to this problem, according to Hamoud, is to use and diffuse: to deal with a religious sequence from Arabic television, addressing and analyzing images and elements so that students “avoid getting hit in the face with the religious message” (68). The goal, she explains, is “to show students that intertextuality goes beyond the words pronounced by the Shaykh” (69). Hamoud explains that religious discourse is based on “emotions and rarely on human reason” (69) As a result, it should be avoided. The pedagogical objective of this approach is not really the analysis of words but contextualization of cultural references (69). In short, the French policy with regard to the Islamic presence in the Arabic language and culture is to deflect it in an attempt to create a psychological break between Arabic and Islam, an approach which is flawed both pedagogically and philosophically, posing some serious ethical problems. Not only will such an approach alienate students of Arab ancestry, contributing to Arabic language attrition, a problem facing Arabic-speaking Muslims living outside of the Arabic-Islamic world, it will create a generation of culturally illiterate Arabic speakers. Any student of “secular Arabic” will be unable to communicate cross-culturally with native-speaking Arabs for the simple fact that virtually every politeness expression in Arabic is religious in nature. As Dimitrios Thanasoulas has explained, effective communication is more than a matter of language proficiency, it is a question of cultural competence which leads to empathy and respect toward different cultures, promoting objectivity and cultural perspicacity.

For over fifty years, language scholars have universally acknowledged the importance of teaching culture in the language classroom. This includes Lado (1957, 1964, 1986), Hall (1959), Politzer (1959), Huebener (1959), Desberg (1961), Fotitch (1961), Landar (1965), Seelye (1974, 1984), and Brooks (1960, 1968), who emphasized the importance of culture for language learning. Other important scholars include Nostrand (1967, 1974), Rivers (1968, 1981), Corder, (1968), Jalling (1968), Henle (1970), Savignon (1972), Tucker and Lambert (1972), Seelye (1974, 1984, 1988), Lafayette (1975), Saville-Troike (1975), Reynolds and Skilbeck (1976), McLeod (1976), Howell and Vetter (1976), Canale and Swain (1980), Goodenough (1981), Rivers (1981), Samovar, Porter and Jain (1981), Grove (1982), Hammerly (1982), Levinson (1983), Williams (1983), Kallenbach and Hodges (1983), Higgs (1984), Fowler (1986), and Omaggio (1986). Having accepted the importance of teaching language within the context of culture, these scholars considered ways of incorporating culture into language instruction. Some, focused on sociolinguistics; others were concerned with communicative competence and integrating language and culture more naturally. And yet others worked on enhancing the role of culture in the foreign language curriculum, producing teaching-oriented texts with detailed chapters on culture teaching for the foreign language classroom. Regardless of their individual interests, the predominant goal was now clearly established: communicating within the cultural context of the target language.

These scholars were followed by the likes of Melde (1987), LaForge (1983), Valdés (1986), Damen (1987), Kramsch (1987, 1988, 1993), Robinson (1988), Odlin (1989), Preston (1989), Byram (1989), Fairclough (1989, 1995), Steele (1989), Lakoff (1990), Leiss (1990), Baumgratz-Gangl (1990), Swaffar (1992), Street (1993), Tomalin and Stempleski (1993), Kramsch (1993, 1987a, 1988), Bessmertnyi (1994), Montgomery and Reid-Thomas (1994), Byram and Morgan (1994), Cruz, Bonissone, and Baff (1995), Bruner (1996), Tavares and Cavalcanti (1996), Carter and McRae (1996), Lessard-Clouston (1997), Cormeraie (1997), Humphrey (1997), Killick and Poveda (1997), Cormeraie (1997), Henrichsen (1998), Salzman (1998), Henrichsen (1998), Singhal (1998), Straub (1999) and Wierzbicka (1999) all of who delved into the dynamics of culture and its vital contribution to language learning. Of course, this is merely a general survey on the subject of teaching culture in the language classroom meant to illustrate the universally acknowledged importance of cultural literacy.

The pedagogical problems posed by French proponents of “secular Arabic” do not reflect on Arabic language instruction in general. In fact, the methodology employed in teaching Arabic has evolved in the same fashion as that used to teach English, French, Spanish, and other languages. The early language texts produced by the French and the British during colonial times like the Cours d’arabe marocain by Aldécoa, were deeply rooted in the tradition of grammar translation, a trend that continued to Richard Harrell’s Colloquial Moroccan Arabic, Megally and Mansour’s Arabic Course Handbook and Peter Abboud’s Elementary Modern Standard Arabic. Although Harrel, Megally, Mansour, and Abboud followed a traditional approach to teaching Arabic, they included many cultural components. Abboud’s text dominated Arabic instruction in the English-speaking world through the 70s and 80s, being replaced in the mid 90s by Kristen Brustad’s al-Kitab fi ta’allum al-‘arabiyyah: A Textbook for Beginning Arabic which contains selections of Qur’an and Hadith, knowledge deemed essential for a student of the language. A more recent book, Ahlan wa Sahlan: Functional Modern Standard Arabic for Intermediate Learners by Mahdi Alosh equally focuses on aspects of Arabic-Islamic culture. Several other books appeared in the 90s dealing with Arabic dialects, including Colloquial Moroccan Arabic by Mohammed Zaim which reflects the language as spoken with its rich body of Allah expressions.

For all of these scholars, learning a foreign language also means learning a foreign culture, and culture includes religious components, particularly in the Arabic-Islamic world. Culture, of course, is not merely a repository of facts. It involves an understanding of culturally appropriate language use. As Peck has proclaimed, “Culture should be our message to students and language our medium” (1998). In order to achieve this cultural competence, Singhal states that teachers should “present students with a true picture or representation of another culture and language” (1998). The fundamental premise behind all this pedagogy is respect for the “Other” combined with a sincere desire to increase understanding. Clearly, the French approach of censuring and suppressing essential components of Arabic culture, diverting them or downplaying them, serves no sensible pedagogical purpose and can only be politically motivated. It is precisely the attitude condemned by Edward Said when he spoke of an Orientalism which served political ends. Considering the fact that France has already faced widespread riots from its alienated citizens of Arab ancestry, the French approach to Arabic language instruction makes little political and academic sense.

As pedagogically problematic as they may seem to language scholars, the opinions of Paul Balta and Linda Hamoud are perfectly in line with France’s secular philosophy. Despite their motto of liberté, égalité and fraternité the French seem to be half a century behind when it comes to appreciating diversity and pluralism, appearing openly hostile to all things Islamic, including the Arabic language instruction delivered in mosques. To contain their Muslim minority, the French strategy seems clear: mind control, double speak, cultural colonialism, and ideological imperialism. An additional tactic seems to be to outlaw independent Imams, allowing only state-supported scholars; condemn conservative dress-codes in Muslim countries, yet impose a liberal one in France; condemn communalism while marginalizing Muslims; and, of course, support the study of Arabic at home and abroad while undermining its essential religious dimension, seeking to secularize it. It seems that for the French, there is no place for the Islamic religion in public schools, no place for the hijab on the heads of Muslim girls, and, evidently, no place for Islam in the Arabic language.

Works Cited

Aldecoa, M. de. Cours d’arabe marocain. Paris: Société d’éditions géographiques, maritimes et coloniales, 1946.

Alosh, Mahdi. Ahlan wa Sahlan: Functional Modern Standard Arabic for Intermediate Learners. New Haven, CT: Yale UP, 2006.

Balta, Paul. L’Islam dans le monde. Paris: Editions Le Monde, 1991.

Berque, Jacques. The Arabs: their History and Future. Trans. Jean Stewart. New York: Frederick A. Praeger, 1964.

Bessmertnyi, Alexander. “Teaching Cultural Literacy to Foreign-Language Students.”

English Forum 32:1 (1994). Internet:
http://exchanges.state.gov/forum/vols/ vol32/no1/p24.htm.

Bishai, Wilson B. Islamic History of the Middle East: Backgrounds, Development and the Fall of the Arab Empire. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1968.

Brooks, Nelson H. Language and Language Learning. New York: Harcourt: Brace Jovanovich, 1960.

- -. “Teaching Culture in the Foreign Language Classroom.” Foreign Language Annals 1 (1968): 204-17.

- -. “The Analysis of Foreign and Familiar Cultures.” The Culture Revolution in Foreign Language Teaching. Ed. R. Lafayette. Skokie, Illinois: National Textbook Company, 1975.

Bruner, Jerome S. The Culture of Education. USA: Harvard UP, 1996.

Byram, Michael. Teaching and Learning Language and Culture. Philadelphia: Miltilingual Matters, 1994.

Canale, Michael, and M. Swain. “Theoretical Bases of Communicative Approaches to Second Language Teaching and Testing.” Applied Linguistics 1.1 (1980): 1-47.

Carter, Ronald A. Language, Literature and the Learner: Creative Language Practice. London: Longman, 1996.

Corder, S. Pit. “Film and Television in Modern Language Teaching.” Modern Language Teaching. Ed. H. Jalling. London: Oxford UP, 1968.

Cormeraie, Sylvette. “From Theoretical Insights to Best Practice for Successful Inter-Cultural Education: The Crucial Transmission.” Proceedings of the Conference at Leeds Metropolitan University, 15-16 Dec. 1997.

Cruz, G. I., Paola R. Bonissone, and S.J. Baff. “The Teaching of Culture in Bilingual Education Programs: Moving Beyond the Basics.” New York State Association for Bilingual Education Journal 10 (1995): 1-5.

Damen, Louise. Culture Learning: The Fifth Dimension in the Language Classroom.

Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1987.

Desberg, D. “Language as an Aspect of Cultural Behavior.” Teaching Foreign Languages in the Modern World. Ed. T. Fotitch. Washington: The Catholic University of America P, 1961.

Fairclough, Norman. Language and Power. London: Longman, 1989.

- -. Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Longman, 1995.

Fishman, Joshua. In Praise of the Beloved Language: A Comparative View of Positive Ethnolinguistic Consciousness. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 1996.

Fotitch, Tatiana. Teaching Foreign Languages in the Modern World. Washington: The Catholic University of America P, 1961.

Fowler, Roger. Linguistic Criticism. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1986.

Gibb, Sir Hamilton A.R. Arabic Literature: An Introduction. 2nd ed. Oxford: Clarendon P, 1963.

Goodenough, Ward H. Culture, Language, and Society. London: The Benjamin / Cummings Publishing Company, 1981.

Grove, Cornelius. L. “Improving Intercultural Learning through the Orientation of Sojourners.” Occasional Papers in Intercultural Learning 1 (1982); The International Schools Journal 4 (1982). Internet: http://www.Grovewell.com/pub-2-expat.html.

Hammerly, Hector. Synthesis in Language Teaching. Blaine, WA: Second Language Publications, 1982.

Hamoud, Linda. “Télévisión et religion en cours d’arabe.” Les langues modernes 98:3 (2004): 60-69.

Henle, Paul. Language, Thought and Culture. Michigan: Michigan UP, 1970.

Henrichsen, Lynn E. “Understanding Culture and Helping Students Understand Culture. 1998.” Internet: http://linguistics.byu.edu/classes/ling577lh/ culture.html.

Higgs, Theodore V. Teaching for Proficiency, the Organizing Principle. Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook Company, 1984.

Hottinger, Arnold. The Arabs: Their History, Culture and Place in the Modern World. Berkeley: U of California P, 1963.

Howell, Richard W. Language in Behavior. New York: Human Sciences P, 1976.

Huebener, Theodore. How to Teach Foreign Languages Effectively. New York: New York UP, 1959.

Humphrey, D. “Integrating Intercultural Training Material in the ELT Classroom.” Cross-cultural Capability: the Why, the Ways & the Means: New Theories & Methodologies in Language Education: Proceedings of the Conference at Leeds Metropolitan University, 15-16 Dec. 1997. Ed. David Killick and Margaret Parry.

Jalling, Hans. Modern Language Teaching. London: Oxford UP, 1968.

Kallenbach, Warren. Education and Society. Ohio: Charles E. Merrill Books, 1963.

Killick, D., and J. Poveda. “Perceptions of Cross-Cultural Capability: is EFL Another Language?” Proceedings of the conference at Leeds Metropolitan University, 15-16 Dec. 1997.

Kramsch, Claire. “Socialization and Literacy in a Foreign Language: Learning through Interaction.” Theory into Practice. 26 Apr. Columbus: The Ohio State University, 1987.

- -. “Foreign Language Textbooks’ Construction of Foreign Reality.” Canadian Modern Language Review 44:1 (1987).

- -. “The Cultural Discourse of Foreign Language Textbooks.” Ed. A. Singerman. Toward a New Integration of Language and Culture. Northeast Conference Reports 1988. Middlebury, Vermont: Northeast Conference, 1988.

- -. Context and Culture in Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1993.

Lado, Robert. Linguistics across Cultures. Ann Arbor: The U of Michigan P, 1957.

- -. Language Teaching: A Scientific Approach. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1964.

- -. “How to Compare Two Cultures.” Culture Bound: Bridging the Cultural Gap in Language Teaching. Ed. Mario Valdés. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1986.

Lafayette, R. The Cultural Revolution in Foreign Languages: A Guide for Building the Modern Curriculum. Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook Company, 1975.

Laffin, John. The Arab Mind Considered: A Need for Understanding. New York: Taplinger, 1975.

LaForge, Paul G. Counseling and Culture in Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon P, 1983.

Lakoff, Robin T. Talking Power: The Politics of Language. New York: Basic Books, 1990.

Landar, Herbert J. Language and Culture. USA: Oxford UP, 1965.

Lessard-Clouston, Michael. “Towards an Understanding of Culture in L2/FL Education.”

Ed. K.G. Ronko. Studies in English 25: 131-150 Japan: Kwansei Gakuin UP, 1997.

Levinson, Stephen C. Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1983.

López-Morillas, Consuelo. “Aljamiado and the Moriscos Islamicization of Spanish.” Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 1994: 17-23.

Manderville, Peter P. “Muslim Youth in Europe.” Islam, Europe’s Second Religion: The

New Social, Cultural and Political Landscape. Ed. Shireen T. Hunter. Westport, Connecticut / London: Praeger, 2002. 219-29.

McLeod, B. “The Relevance of Anthropology to Language Teaching.” TESOL Quarterly 10.2 (1976): 211-20.

Megally, Fuad H., and M. Mansoor. Arabic Course Handbook. London: Linguaphone Institute, 1978.

Melde, W. Zur Integration von Landeskunde und Kommunikation im Fremdsprachenunterricht. Tubingen: Gunter Narr Verlag, 1987.

Montgomery, Martin, and H. Reid-Thomas. Language and Social Life. England: The British Council, 1994.

Mutahhari, Morteza, Muhammad Husayn Tabataba’i, and Ruhullah Khomeini. Luz interior. Trans. Abu Dharr Manzolillo. Buenos Aires: Editorial Jorge Luis Vallejo, 1997.

Nasr, Seyyed Hossein The Heart of Islam. San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 2002.

Nicholson, Reynold A. A Literary History of the Arabs. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1966.

Nostrand, Howard L. “A Second Culture: New Imperative for American Education.” Ed.

Joseph Michel. Foreign Language Teaching: An Anthology. London: Collier-MacMillan, 1967.

- -. “Empathy for a second culture: Motivations and techniques.” Ed. G.A. JarResponding to New Realities: ACTFL Foreign Language Education Series 5. Skokie, Illinois: National Textbook, 1974.

Omaggio-Hadley, Alice. Teaching Language in Context: Proficiency-Oriented Instruction. Boston: Heinle & Heinle, 1986.

Peck, D. Teaching Culture: Beyond Language. Yale: New Haven Teachers Institute, 1998.

Politzer, R.L. “Developing Cultural Understanding through Foreign Language Study.” Report of the Fifth Annual Round Table Meeting on Linguistics and Language Teaching. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown UP, 1959: 99-105.

Preston, Dennis R. Sociolinguistics and Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Blackwell, 1989.

Reynolds, John C. Culture and the Classroom. London: Open Books, 1976.

Rivers, Wilga. M. Teaching Foreign Language Skills. Chicago: The U of Chicago P, 1968.

- -. Teaching Foreign Language Skills. 2nd ed. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1981.

Robinson, Gail L. Crosscultural Understanding. New York: Prentice-Hall, 1988.

Rosenthl, Franz. “Literature.” The Legacy of Islam. 2nd ed. Ed. Joseph Schacht with C.E. Bosworth. Oxford: Clarendon P, 1974. 318-49.

Said, Edward. Orientalism. New York: Vintage, 1979.

Salzmann, Zdenek. Language, Culture and Society: An Introduction to Linguistic Anthropology. USA: Westview P, 1998.

Samovar, Larry A. Understanding Intercultural Communication. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 1981.

Savignon, Sandra J. Communicative Competence: An Experiment in Foreign Language Testing. Philadelphia: Centre for Curriculum Development, 1972.

Saville-Troike, Muriel. 1975. “Teaching English as a Second Culture.” Eds. R. Crymes and W. Norris. On TESOL 74. Washington: TESOL, 1975: 83-94.

Seelye, H. Ned. Teaching Culture: Strategies for Foreign Language Educators. Skokie, IL: National Textbook Company, 1974.

- -. Teaching culture: Strategies for Inter-Cultural Communication. Rev. ed. Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook Company, 1984.

- -. Teaching Culture. Lincolnwood, IL.: National Textbook Company, 1988.

Singhal, Meena. “Teaching Culture in the Foreign Language Classroom.” Thai TESOL Bulletin 11.1 (1998).

Steele, R. “Teaching Language and Culture: Old Problems and New Approaches.” Ed. James E. Alatis. Georgetown University Roundtable on Languages and Linguistics. Washington: Georgetown UP, 1989: 153-62.

Straub, Hans. “Designing a Cross-Cultural Course.” English Forum 37.3 (1999). Internet: http://exchanges.state.gov/forum/vols/vol37/no3/p2.htm.

Street, B. “Culture is a Verb: Anthropological Aspects of Language and Cultural Process.” Eds. David Graddol, Linda Thompson, and Michael Byram. Language and Culture. Clevedon, Avon: Multilingual Matters and BAAL, 1993: 23-43.

Swaffar, J. “Written Texts and Cultural Readings.” Eds. C. Kramsch and S. McConnel-

Ginet. Text and Context: Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives on Language Study. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath, 1992.

Tavares, Roseanne, and Ildney Cavalcanti, I. “Developing Cultural Awareness in EFL Classrooms.” English Forum 34:3 (1996). Internet: http://e xchanges.state.gov/ forum/vols/vol34/no3/p18.htm.

Thanasoulas, Dimitrios. “The Importance of Teaching Culture in the Foreign Language

Classroom.” Radical Pedagogy (2001). Internet:
http://radicalpedagogy.icaap.org/content/issue3_3/7-thanasoulas.html.

Thomson, Ahmad. Blood on the Cross: Islam in Spain in the Light of Christian Persecution Through the Ages. London: Ta-Ha Publishers, 1989.

Tomalin, Barry. Cultural Awareness. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1993.

Tucker, G. R., and Lambert, W. E. “Sociocultural Aspects of Foreign-Language Study.”

Ed. J.W. Dodge. Northeast Conference Reports. Montpellier, Vermont: The Capital City P, 1972.

Turner Medhi, Beverlee, ed. The Arabs in America: 1492-1977: A Chronology and Fact Book. Dobbs Ferry, NY: Oceana Publications, 1978.

Valdés, Mario J., ed. Culture Bound: Bridging the Cultural Gap in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1986.

Wierzbicka, Anna. Emotions across Languages and Cultures: Diversity and Universals. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1999.

Williams, Raymond. Keywords: A Vocabulary of Culture and Society. London: Fontana, 1983.

Zaim, Mohammed. Colloquial Moroccan Arabic. Fez: ALIF, 1993.

• 1. This article was previously published in The International Journal of the Humanities 4:6 (2007): 17-24. The paper can be purchased online at: http://ijh.cgpublisher.com/product/ pub.26/prod.869