Mahdia Dialect: An Urban Vernacular in the Tunisian Sahel Context

languages Article Mahdia Dialect: An Urban Vernacular in the Tunisian Sahel Context Cristina La Rosa Department of Humanities (DISUM), University of Catania, 95124 Catania, Italy; [email protected] Abstract: This paper aims to present some preliminary results of the linguistic analysis of the dialect of the Wilāya of Mahdia on which few studies exist, focused mainly on phonology. My analysis, here extended to the morpho-syntactic level, is based on a corpus of interviews taken from some social media pages. The sample will be composed of respondents of different geographical origin (from Mahdia and some nearby towns), gender, age and social background. A deeper knowledge of the Arabic of Mahdia region, which is a bundle of urban, Bedouin and “villageois” varieties, would contribute to throw new light on the features of the Sah.lı̄ dialects and would add a small piece to the complex mosaic of Tunisian and Maghrebi dialects, whose traditional categories of classification should be reconsidered. Keywords: Mahdia Arabic; Maghribi Arabic; Tunisia; Sahel; urban dialects; Bedouin dialects; villageois dialects; Arabic dialectology; Sociolinguistics 1. Introduction



 Citation: La Rosa, Cristina. 2021. Mahdia Dialect: An Urban Vernacular in the Tunisian Sahel Context. Languages 6: 145. https://doi.org/ 10.3390/languages6030145 Academic Editors: Simone Bettega and Roberta Morano Received: 2 July 2021 Accepted: 23 August 2021 Published: 27 August 2021 Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Copyright: © 2021 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ During the recent years, the need to more precisely examine and describe the varieties of Arabic used in the Tunisian Sahel has been central to the scientific dialectological debate. In fact, there are few systematic studies available on Sahel varieties and the data offered need to be partially reinterpreted. In 1950, William Marçais, with regard to “les parlers villageois” of Tunisia, claimed: “on a surtout en vue ici ceux des bourgs et des petites villes du Sahel [ . . . ] n’ont fait encore l’objet d’aucune enquête” (Marçais 1950, pp. 210–11).1 The scholar classified the non-coastal dialects of Sahel as “villageois” and introducted a third category of dialects sharing both sedentary and Bedouin features (see also (Marçais and Guiga 1925, p. XXV)). The first systematic study on a Sahel variety is Textes arabes de Takroûna by William Marçais. According to him (Marçais and Guiga 1925, p. XIX), “Le parler arabe de Takroûna concorde dans l’ensemble avec ceux des centres agricoles, bourgs et villages, qui parsèment la region côtière de la Tunisie centrale, communément appelée Sâh.el [ . . . ] depuis le moyen âge. Séparés les uns les autres par des différences de detail, ces parlers relèvent, quant à la phonétique et à la grammaire, d’un même type general dont le takroûni n’est qu’une variété particulière”.2 Marçais and Guiga offered a linguistic study and also a monumental glossary of the variety considered (Marçais and Guiga 1958). In 1980, Talmoudi classified the Tunisian dialects in four groups: The varieties of Sahel, which are urban and semi-urban, these latter “spoken in small villages as Ksibet Sūsa and Khnis display features of both nomadic and sedentary dialects”. The Northern dialects are also “divided into two types: urban and rural. The villagers on the left side of Oued Medjerda speak so-called Zba:li dialects (mountain dialects) which have features in common with North East Algerian vernaculars”. The Central Western dialects are rural and nomadic. The rural ones “resemble in several respects the East Arabic dialects”. The Southern dialects are divided in three groups: “urban dialects in Sfax, rural in the oasis and nomadic. The latter is spoken by semi-pastoral people in Sahara” (Talmoudi 1980, pp. 10–11). “The genuine dialect of Sūsa”, according to the scholar, is spoken in the Medina by the older generation, but the author also took into account the innovations of 4.0/). Languages 2021, 6, 145. https://doi.org/10.3390/languages6030145 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/languages ī Languages 2021, 6, 145 2 of 23 the younger generation for the composition of his study on the Arabic of Sousse (Talmoudi 1980, p. 13). Lajmi, in 2009, Zammit, in 2014, and Sellami, in 2019, conducted some investigation on some features of Sfaxi Arabic, providing new elements for the knowledge of the dialects of Sahel. (Mion 2015, 2018)3 offered some reflections on the origin of this “third category” of dialects, that is the “villageois”, and on the phenomena that characterise Tunisian “villageois” dialects, whose ‘mixed’ features are the product of a long process of interdialectal contact between a sedentary and a Bedouin variety of Arabic. The latter was introduced by the Banū Hilāl who invaded the Maghreb around the 11th century. Mion and Luca D’Anna during the “Prima giornata di dialettologia maghrebina” (Cagliari May 16 2019), launched the research project “The Tunisian Sahel: Dialectological, Historical and Sociolinguistic Perspectives”, which aims at shedding new light on the features of the Arabic varieties of Tunisian Sahel, which, in fact, should be better described regardless of the existing rigid classification criteria (Bedouin/urban/rural), which do not highlight the richness characterising the varieties spoken in the region (Mion 2015). A century after Marçais’ studies, however, no systematic research on the Bedouin and urban varieties of the Sahel region has been conducted, yet. My paper intends to be a modest contribution to the knowledge of the varieties of ā the area, starting from the analysis of the dialect(s) of Wilāyat al-Mahdiyya (henceforth Mahdia). Marçais and later scholars have included Mahdia Arabic among the varieties used in the coastal towns of Sahel, such as Monastir, Sousse and Sfax. (Saada 1984, p. 17) included the urban dialect of Mahdia among “les parlers arabes des capitales”, but she also stated that she did not have elements to classify the varieties used in the neighbouring villages. At present, there are few studies entirely dedicated to the Arabic of Mahdia, and the dialects of the surrounding towns and villages have never been described. (Attia 1969) offered a phonological analysis of the variety used by the fishing community in the 1960s. What emerges from his paper is a quick description of the phonological inventory of the Mahdia dialect, accompanied by few examples. In his paper, the scholar highlighted some well-known features of Mahdia Arabic: The passage of the interdental /t/ and /d/ to /d/ and /t/, the reduction of the diphthongs /ay/ and /aw/ to /ē/ and /ō/ in the Ḫ ī middle of a word and the voiced articulation of /q/ in some terms such as īdī garʿAlī a “irrigated land” and gamra “moon” (Attia 1969, p. 125). He also quickly focused on combinatory phonetics, vowels and vocalic phenomena such as final imāla, syllable patterns and prosody. Based on these phenomena, Attia defined Mahdia Arabic an urban variety.4 Yoda’s study (2008) added some important information to the knowledge of the vocal system of Mahdia dialect. In fact, the scholar focused on the special status of Mahdia Arabic having /ē/ and /ō/ phonemes, unlike the other sedentary dialects, and attributed the presence of these phonemes to the influence of the nearby village dialects. Besides, in 2019, Yoda published some texts in Mahdia Arabic, accompanied by a simple grammatical sketch concerning mainly phonology. In his paper, he writes that Mahdia Arabic: “is an eastern Maghribi sedentary dialect showing some features of the village dialects of the region, the most conspicuous being the word-final imāla ē. Among the sedentary dialects of Tunisia, Mahdāwı̄ dialect [ . . . ] is characterized by a five-long-vowel system [ . . . ] and the correspondence of the interdentals of Old Arabic [ . . . ] to plosives, as attested in most of the Jewish dialects of Tunisia. In this respect the dialect in question is worthy of more detailed descriptions”. (Yoda 2019, p. 55). It is clear, however, that the few existing studies have focused mainly on the vowel and consonant system. Therefore, the linguistic analysis of Mahdia variety should be extended to all linguistic levels. It would also be fruitful to extend the research to the varieties used in the territory near the town, which remain to be investigated (except for D’Anna’s study about Chebba: see (D’Anna 2020)). In fact, Mahdia Arabic is worthy of study because it is surrounded by village varieties and, since no language can live isolated and separated Languages 2021, 6, 145 ā ī 3 of 23 ī from the adjacent varieties, it could have some peculiarities owing to contact phenomena. That is, as Yoda already showed, it is an urban variety containing some village features. In addition to this, a deeper knowledge of the Arabic of Mahdia region, which is a bundle of urban, Bedouin and “villageois” varieties, would contribute to shed new light on the features of the Sahel dialects and would add a small piece to the complex mosaic of Tunisian and Maghrebi dialects. In fact, a deeper knowledge of the varieties spoken in this area would also be useful to understand through which historical and socio-linguistic dynamics these dialects originated, since we have scant data on the history of Tunisian dialect(s). More generally, this would also help provide a more detailed and specific classification of the dialects of the area (Taine-Cheikh 2017; Guerrero 2018; Benkato 2019), which share many common features, but present many differences that deserve to be highlited.5 ā Mahdia and the surrounding towns Mahdia is a town whose importance and splendour are rooted centuries ago. The geographer al-Idrı̄sı̄ (d. 1175–1176) describes Mahdia as a beautiful town, two days from Sfax and Kairouan. Mahdia, not long before his arrival, had a harbour visited by merchant ships from everywhere: Maghrib, Mashriq, al-Andalus and Christian countries. al-Idrı̄sı̄ informs us that, during those times, Mahdia was already famous throughout the world because of its goods and renowned clothes that were exported to all the other countries, but he also adds that, since the Norman conquest, its trade has been strongly reduced. Moreover, the geographer defines the wall surrounding the town a wonder worthy of mention (Bresc and Nef 1999, pp. 183–84). Mahdia, during al-Idrı̄sı̄’s times, was composed of two towns: Mahdia, the seat of the power and the residence of the sovereign, and al-Zawı̄la. The latter was beautiful and densely populated with merchants. The geographer writes of Mahdia with a sort of nostalgia because the invasion of the “Arabs”, that is the Banū Hilāl,6 and of the later Norman conquest, destroyed many important and emblematic aspects of the town. Mahdia, however, remained the capital of Ifrı̄qiyā (Bresc and Nef 1999, pp. 183–86). Nowadays, the vestiges of a flourishing medieval city can be retraced in its old madı̄na. Mahdia was built on a peninsula (see Figure 1), situated on the Eastern coast in the centre of the Republic of Tunisia. It is 200 km from the capital, Tunis, has a mild climate, which is usually affected by the Mediterranean air currents, and its economy is based on agriculture, especially on oil production, fishing and craft industries specialised in producing silk, leather clothing and mosaics. Thanks to its position on a 75-km-long coast, close to Sousse and El Jem, tourism also plays an important role in its economic activities.7 Mahdia is a town of pre-Hilalian foundation that later underwent the Hilali invasion. Founded in īdī ʿAlī ī UbaydḪAllāh al-Mahdı̄ as the new capital of the Reign, 909 A.D. by the Fatimid Caliph replacing Kairouan, the Aġlabid capital, Mahdia was the first urban settlement in the peninsula. The history of the town is quite complex. The ancient nucleus was the already mentioned quarter of al-Zawı̄la, which was also the commercial core. During the Hilalian invasion, Mahdia regained its role of capital, after a short time in which the capital was al-Mans.ūriyya. In 1087, Mahdia was conquered by Pisans and Genoans, then by Normans in 1123, in 1134 by the Hammādids and, in 1140, the Normans of Sicily imposed harsh conditions on the town. Then, Roger II caused the end of the Zı̄rid Dinasty Until the French protectorate of 1884, and the town was attacked and conquered by numerous dynasties and conquerors and was even destroyed and plundered (Talbi 1986, pp. 1246–947). The suburb of al-Zawı̄la was completely destroyed during the Hilalian conquest and rebuilt in 1200. As a consequence of centuries of riots, pillages and plagues, in the 16th and 17th centuries, the composition of the population changed above all because of two elemets: The arrival of the Muslim refugees coming from al-Andalus and the introduction of the Turkish garrisons. According to Talbi, in 1986, 60% of the population was composed of descendants of the Kouloughlis (Bearman et al. 1986, p. 366),8 affecting onomastics and customs (Talbi 1986, p. 1247). Languages 2021, 6, 145 region and its consequences on the Arabic of the region, is that “en – Ismāʿīl al ṣūr […] quitta la ville de Mahdia pour établir sa résidence à Sabra, en provoquant la ruine de l’ancien siège de l’empire fatimide et la perte d qui nous incite aujourd’hui à voir en cela un évenement qui laisse le champ libre, plus ā ī 4 of 23 tard, à un repeuplement de la part de gens beaucoup moins urbanisés” (Mion 2015 ī Figure 1. Contemporay map of Mahdia 9 . (Goitein 2010, p. 311) claimed that Mahdia and some coastal towns Tunisia resisted Idrīsī, we findofMonastir (al 10 but their hinterland the perpetual chaosofinnavigation which the from Hilalian invasion the country, nastīr) at 30 miles Mahdia. Thethrew geographer repports only that the town was lost and was exposed to the subsequent attacks from the Normans and Italians. In the Geniza documents, the Christian and the Almohad conquests are well documented as being a catastrophe and a cause of economic decline of the region. Despite this, the – economic exchanges between Tunisia, Italy, Spain and Syria ribāṭ continued, but some merchants with their families were obliged to move to Sicily and Egypt. Moreover, in the 11th century, ū ātheā Banū Hilāl obliged the inhabitants of the villages to seek the repeated pillaging by safety within the walls of the surrounding towns; besides, some nomadic populations have returned to the steppes (Decret 2003). These population movements, only in part caused by the Hilalian invasion, must have had an important influence on the Tunisian Arabic language, regarding which we currently have scanty or no data. (Mion 2015, pp. 275–76) distinguishes the two phases of the Arabization of Sahel and underlines some relevant historical events which had linguistic consequences: In the pre-Hilali period, the region was probably inhabited by some sedentary Arabized people, and during this phase, the main urban features of Sahel Arabic developed. The Hilalian invasions of the 11th century deeply troubled the region to the extent that many urban centers and villages were threatened n Ḫaldūn (d. (d 1406), in the 14th century, writes that only some and disappeared, so that Ibn ulturecould couldbebefound in some families from Kairouan or Mahdia. weak traces of sedentary culture A relevant piece of information, linked to the population movement in Mahdia region īdī ʿAlī Ḫ .īūr ı̄lāʿīal-Mans and its consequences on the Arabic of the region, is that “en 945–46 Ismā ṣū [ . . . ] quitta la ville de Mahdia pour établir sa résidence à Sabra, en provoquant la ruine de l’ancien siège de l’empire fatimide et la perte des habitants et ses faubourgs, ce qui nous incite aujourd’hui à voir en cela un évenement qui laisse le champ libre, plus tard, à un repeuplement de la part de gens beaucoup moins urbanisés” (Mion 2015, p. 275). If we continue our imaginary journey, guided by al-Idrı̄sı̄, we find Monastir (alMunastı̄r) at 30 miles of navigation from Mahdia. The geographer repports only that the town has some castles in which some fruits are produced and then exported to Mahdia and that the inhabitants of the latter bury their dead in the cemetery of Monastir (Bresc and Nef 1999, pp. 184–85). Actually, after the Arab conquest of the mid 8th century, Monastir became renowned for religious reasons because of its ribāt. and its cemetery in which important personalities, such as the last members of the Zirid dinasty, were buried. As recounted by the Imām al-Māzarı̄ (d. 1141), Monastir and Mahdia appear to be very connected and seem to have been spared from the Hilalian invasions. Monastir was described as a prosperous town whose religious importance was proved by the piligrimage of numerous people from the nearby regions, similarly to what happened in the holy city of Kairouan (Soucek 1993, pp. 227–29). āā āā īī (d. 1141), Monastir and Mahdia appear to be As recounted by the Imām al Māzarī Languages 2021, 6, 145 5 of 23 – āā end al īī (see km Monastir south of Tunis, and located today ison part the Wilāyat Figure 2). Itsabout main is a town theofsouthern ofMunastīr the Gulf of Hammamet, 160 km south of Tunis, and today is part of the Wilāyat al-Munastı̄r (see Figure 2). Its main īī (d. 1094) to the fact commercial activities are tourism, the textile industry for wool Bakrī processing, the due production of salt, which is an ancient activity already described by al-Bakrı̄ (d. 1094) due to the fact that – the town was built near a salt pan, soap, olive oil and fishing. Monastir is also a university town (for further details on the history of Monastir, see (Soucek 1993, pp. 227–29)). 11 Figure 2. Map of Monastir. āā ’sākin) smalltown townof ofthe theTunisian TunisianSahel Sahellocated locatedatataadozen dozen Msaken (Arabic: M’sākin) isisaasmall kilometres to the south of Sousse. Administratively dependent on the governorate of Sousse, it has an increasing number of inhabitants in the summer due to the return of expatriates, most of whom work in France.12 For this reason, its inhabitants call Msaken “la “la Petite Paris”. Its economy is based on olive oil production. There however, a numPetite Paris”. Its economy is based on olive oil production. There are,are, however, a number of handicraft and industrial enterprises in the surrounding area, set up by old emigrants who returned to Msaken in the 1980s (Ma Mung 1984). Msaken was founded during the Hafisd dynasty in the 14th century (Bouhlel 2009, p. 125). A brief description of Msaken as a holy place in Tunisia together with Kairouan is contained in Tunisie et tunisiens by François Bournand (Bournand 1893, pp. 311–13) – who actually quotes the information offered in Promenades d’une Française dans la régence de Tunis Promenades d’une Française dans la régence de Tuby (Voisins d’Ambre 1884, pp. 171–74).– Bournand states that Msaken is a small town of (Voisins d’Ambre about 9000 inhabitants, 9 km from Sousse, built in a slightly mountainous area planted ī ī ʿAlī ʿAlı̄ ī b. b.b.Ḫ Ḫalīfa, īdī ī , with olive trees, famous as a religious place because of the madrasa of ofSı̄dı̄ Sīdī ʿAlī Ḫalīfa, ents and the high level of renowned in North Africa because of the high number of students and the high level of teaching of its university. Msaken is considered by the author to be like Seville, Padua, Oxford or Cologne. The town occupied a large area with houses surrounded by greenery, while the centre of the town developed along the main road and had several schools and mosques. According to M.me de Voisins, entry to the holy city was forbidden to Christians and especially Europeans. For this reason, the author claims to have seen Msaken from a nearby hill and that she found it fascinating to the the point that she was very impressed by it. Then, she gives a rather exotic and Eurocentric description of the town (Voisins d’Ambre 1884, pp. 171–74; Bournand 1893, pp. 311–14). Ma Mung (1984, p. 163), stated that in 1984, Msaken had 41,219 inhabitants and that it was among the largest 15 or 16 towns of Tunisia, together with Mahdia. In his study, he focused on the importance of the migratory movement that affected a large part of the population from the 1960s onwards, which had important effects on the economy of Languages 2021, 6, 145 6 of 23 the country.Today, Msaken is the second town of Sahel in terms of size; its inhabitants constantly move back and forth to the rural and village hinterland as well as to Sousse. The growing integration of this town into the economic space of the regional metropolis, Sousse, means that it has become a basin of intense activity (industrial, construction and services) and, above all, of employment for the populations of the surrounding areas. The main categories of commuters are those employed in industry and government, especially teachers (Boubakri and Lamine 1992).13 According to (Bouhlel 2009, p. 126), Msaken is close to several small towns that show different linguistic features from each other as well as some common features. The scholar pointed out that Msaken Arabic has some peculiarities that distinguish it from the other Tunsian varieties. Moreover, this variety is in continuous evolution because of its inhabitants’ migration movements, and therefore the “original” Msaken variety would be spoken only by aged people, children, emigrated and housewives. 2. Materials and Methods This paper offers some preliminary results of the linguistic analysis of the dialect(s) of the Wilāya of Mahdia, based on a corpus of interviews taken from some social media pages, which will be presented below. The sample is composed of speakers of different geographical origin, gender, age and social background. The videos analysed have been collected between 2019 and 2021 and the speakers speak varieties of Tunisian Arabic that are more or less dialectal in the sense that they can be more or less influenced by Modern Standard Arabic, and may have mixed features, depending on the the speakers’ levels of education and their role (i.e., politicians and teachers tend to use a higher register).14 Moreover, their speech can be more or less influenced by the medium used, i.e., radio or video. The role of the Arabic of the capital Tunis and of the main city of Sahel, Sousse, will be highlighted too.15 Starting from the previous studies on Arabic dialectology, and particularly of the Maghribi area and on Tunisian Arabic, I will observe and analyse some of the urban, Bedouin and village isoglosses indicated by Marçais in his studies (Marçais 1950, pp. 207–14) and I will then add some selected morpho-syntactic elements attested in the Arabic of Mahdia. Even if the focus of this study is the urban vernacular of Mahdia, some linguistic elements of some nearby towns will be underlined in order to follow the suggestions of earlier scholars. For this reason, some video-recordings of speakers from some small villages near Mahdia, such as Tlelsa and Teboulba, have been analysed as well as audios of respondents from Monastir and Msaken, since, according to Marçais, the two towns have village features (Marçais 1950, p. 207). Similarly, Saada’s statement “On a recueilli en outre des informations concernant le parler de Bqalta16 qui ne suffisent pas à le classer (parler de Musulmans)” attracted my attention.17 Therefore, several dialogues and interviews contained in numerous online radio and tv programs and social media information pages have been analysed. Due to the difficulty of determining the real background and origins of the speakers involved in the videos available online, deriving from the analysis of online material, I have selected mainly the materials in which the origin of the speakers has been specified by the speaker or the interviewer. Souces for Mahdia and Monastir Arabic For linguistic data on Mahdia and Monastir, I consulted the following online radios that broadcast on their relative Facebook pages: ∗ Menara Fm (http://www.menarafm.net/ accessed on 19 August 2021) is a radio station based in Mahdia since 2019 whose editorial line is based on independence and freedom of expression. It offers many interviews with Tunisian artists and craftsmen and those from other countries in the Arab world, as well as reports, news and live radio broadcasts focused on debates on topical issues chosen by the radio speakers. Languages 2021, 6, 145 7 of 23 ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ It also broadcasts some fixed radio programs, such as Nahārek zı̄n, i.e., “Have a nice day”, in which every morning some presenters give the weather forecasts and the main news of the day. Radio MFM Tunisie (http://www.mfmtunisie.net/ accessed on 19 August 2021) is a generalist radio station that broadcasts in the regions of Mahdia, Sousse and Sfax and offers programs on sport, news, music and society. It also has daily news programs such as Hadret l-youm, i.e., “Conversation of the day”, and Mid Mag, broadcasted at midday. Radio Mahdia (https://www.radio-mahdia.info/ accessed on 19 August 2021) broadcasts almost exclusively news programs. Radio Mahdia 1 (http://www.radiomahdia1.com/ accessed on 19 August 2021) is specialised in tourism and cultural issues. It offers news programs, interviews of the citizens made on the road and interviews of local artists taken in the radio studio, and has a program devoted to children, called Matinal children. Dār al-šabāb Ražı̄š (https://tinyurl.com/2fmb88fx accessed on 19 August 2021) is a web radio based in Mahdia, and particularly in Rajiche, a small coastal town in the Mahdia Governorate, created under the patronage of the Ministry of Youth and Sports of the Tunisian Republic. Among the programs broadcast, Mahdia tah.kı̄, that is “Mahdia speaks”, is interesting since it often brings together people from different generations who discuss a cultural or social topic. This helps analyse the language of speakers of different ages and sex. Radio Monastir (http://www.radiomonastir.tn/ accessed on 19 August 2021) not only provides news from Wilāyat al-Monastir, but also from all Tunisia, and was very useful for analysing the speech of natives of Monastir and Mahdia. It offers news programs, reportages and topical talk shows. I also analysed videos taken from the Facebook pages: Revolution Mahdia, which is a page open to all the inhabitants of Mahdia region whose mission is to foster and promote the freedom of expression and circulation of information in the zone. This is often done through the broadcasting of interviews of the citizen taken on the road. News Mahdia and Ville de Mahdia, both broadcasting news, social and entertainment programs. Sources for Msaken Arabic News on Msaken is provided by the online tv channel Msaken Tv and by Radio RM FM, which is a radio station based in the town broadcasting entertainment programs and news. Both broadcast in their Facebook pages. Sources for Bekalta Arabic As regards Bekalta, I analysed some videos from the Facebook pages 100% ba9louti and Bekalta Today, which provide daily news, reportages and interviews about the town. Except for the programs involving children and young people mentioned earlier, the speakers involved in the radio programs analysed are men and women of all ages. When analysing an oral corpus on media or on social media, the researcher should be aware of many challenges of such a work. In fact, as (Van-Mol 2010, pp. 67–68) states, “people of all layers of society appear in these media to participate, by means of oral expression, which reflects a wide variety of language capabilities and layers”. Van-Mol also distinguishes two main classes of speakers: The first is made of professional workers, such in the case of radio presenters in my corpus, or intellectuals who use a top-down strategy of communication by using a higher register with some dialectal features in order to also be understood by less educated people. The other is composed of less educated people and non-professional workers, i.e., the majority of the speakers in my corpus. However, even if, as Van-Mol states, oral media Arabic gives us the opportunity to observe how people with different linguistic competences communicate with each other, many elements ā Languages 2021, 6, 145 ā ī 8 of 23 that can influence the linguistic variety and register used by speakers should be taken into account. First of all, the kind of media and of program in which they are involved influences their linguistic choices as far as regards the register and the spontaneity of their ā ī speech. Furthermore, the different linguistic competences of young and aged people and of women and men (i.e., linked to age and sex) have a role in their linguistic production. In ī by them, such as dialogues, addition, the topic dealt with and kind of oral text produced interviews, monologues and multilogues, are important. Moreover, the audience who is going to listen to the speakers has to be taken into account because it has an influence on the speaker’s linguistic choices.18 In spite of these challenging aspects, conducting a linguistic analysis through social media resources has some advantages. Firstly, it offers the opportunity to observe many examples of informal communication among several individuals. In fact, it is possible to reach many speakers in different locations, such as small towns and villages thanks to their social media pages. Secondly, it allows research to continue despite the sanitary crisis by remotely studying a linguistic variety and formulating hypotheses that will then be verified during the fieldwork. In fact, even if using social media resources for linguistic analysis has some advantages, it cannot substitute fieldwork. For this reason, the first results presented below will be compared and integrated with those obtained from a period of field research in which I will record some interviews. This was the very first aim of my research, but due to COVID-19, reaching Tunisia has become impossible, at the moment. The data provided by the in-field interviews will show further elements useful in verifying the hypothesis formulated and will provide a more precise description of the varieties used in the Wilāya. During the field work, eventual phenomena linked to diatopic and diastratic variation will be highlighted in order to point out the possible local variants belonging to any social group such as older and younger people, men and women. Moreover, any possible diachronic element that might have contributed to the formation of Mahdia Arabic will be identified and described. This will be done by choosing a sample of speakers that is as varied as possible and by consulting some Arab historical and geographical works. Some selected phonological, morphological and syntactic features will be presented below. ā 3. Results 3.1. Phonological Remarks 3.1.1. Interdentals It is well known (among others, (Marçais 1950, p. 201; Attia 1969, p. 22; Yoda 2008, 2019)) that in Mahdia, Arabic interdentals d/, /t/ and /d./ are substituted by the respective dental consonants /d/, /t/ and /d./. The data collected through the online social media pages analysed are not so unequivocal and show a certain variation.19 /t/ There were several cases of dental realisation of /t/ in /t/ in initial and median positions: istitnā’iyy, istitnā’iyya “exceptional”, aktar “more”, al-tēnı̄20 “the second”, ymatt@l īdī ʿAlī ī l-tlēta “represents/plays”, ātār “antiquities, ruins” and the plural ātārı̄n, el-ǧim a l-tēnı̄Ḫwella “the second or the third week”. The interdental phoneme is also attested, such as in tawra “revolution”, itnı̄n “two (m.)” tmāniya “eight”, al-tēniya “the second”, tlēta or tlēta “three (f.)”, aktar “more”, mitēl “example”, tnāš “twelve” and kāritiyya “catastrophic”. In some cases, the pronunciation of dental/interdental is present in the same informant: mitēl “example”, tnāš “twelve”, but ymattel “represents/plays” and tlātamiya “three hundreds”, tmāniya and tmāniya “eight (f.)”. (D’Anna 2020, p. 88) states that in the word tlāta, only the second interdental is preserved, but in my corpus, there is a certain oscillation in the realisation of /t/ in this word.21 The general tendency seems to show that initial /t/ is more likely to be preserved. In my opinion, the trend in the preservation of the interdental /t/ in the Arabic of Mahdia ā ā Languages 2021, 6, 145 ā ā ī ṯ ā ǧ ṯ ṯ ḏ ā ā ē ā ǧ ā āḏ ā ḏā ā ḏ āḏ ā ā ḏ ā ḏā ṯ ā ā ā ā ē ā ā ā ā ḏ āḏ āḫ ḏā ā ḏ ḏā ḏ āḫāḫ ḥ ā āḫ āḫ ḫ ā āḏā ḫ ī āī ḏ ā ā ḏ āʿ āī āḫ ā ā ā āī ū āḏā āḫ ḫ ī ā ā ā ʿ ə ʿ ū ū ʿ āʿ ī ī ī ʿ ʿ ʿ ə īū ī ī ī ī ṯ ā ā ī ṯ ṯ ṯ ṯ ṯ ī 9 of 23 ṯ ī ṯ ī āṯ ǧ ī may be ṯdue to the influence of Tunis Arabic, which has it. In fact, the Arabic of the to the other “peripheral” varieties of Tunisia because ā capital applies ī āa centripetal force ī of its increasing prestige, due to the fostering of travel and education during the recent years (Gibson ī2002, pp. 29–30). īMedia and social media, on which several programs are ā ǧ broadcast in dāriǧa,ṯhave a relevant role in this process too. In general, as Gibson showed, Arabic dialects do not follow the general trend affecting many ṯ other languages of the world, that is they do not tend towards a levelling to Modern Standardṯ Arabic, but they ṯ are inclined to be closer to the standard dialect variety of the region, such as in the case of ṯ ṯ ā ā Tunis Arabic.22 ā ā ā āḏ ē ī ṯ ḏ ā ā ē /d/ ā āḏ ēḏ ī The phenomenon interdental consonant, which, however, ā ǧ is less evident in the voiced ā ē would ē like to”, sometimes oscillates with /d/: asātida “professors”, mādabiyya “Iā want/I ā ā ā āḏ ē ī ḏ ḏ ā āḏ ḫḏā ā hādāka “that (m.)”, hāda (Yoda 2019, p. 59), which alternates with hāda “this”, hēdı̄ “this m”., ā ē ē ē hēdiyya “this (f.)” (attested in Tlelsa; see also Yoda 2019, p. 65; Attia 1969, p. 123). The same ī the demonstratives ḏ speaker, ḏ phenomenon ā isāḏ āḏ ḫḏā ḫ ēcontaining a /d/.āIn the same extended toē all ē ē ḏ consonant in the same utterance: kadē w-kadē “so and we find the twoḏā realisations of the ḏ ḏ ā āḏ ḫḏā ā ḫ ē ic: yāḫu so”, hadeyaḏ but also hādiya “this (f.)” hāda “this (m.)”, na dāw “we take”, but mādabiya “I ḏā ḏ ē featureē is attested in a wide audience, different by age and sex want/I would like to”. This ḫḏā ā ē āḫ ḥ ḏ ic: yāḫu and has also been attested by Yoda, for instance, dē “he took”ḫ(Yoda 2019, p. 63). ā ā ḏā ḏ In Sousse, the verb hdā loses its final /d/ in the imperfect conjugation (Talmoudi āāḥ 1980, ā ā āsome ā ḏ also available in Mahdia Arabic: āḏ ḫ ēp. 93), and ic: yāḫu examples are yā u “he takes”. The ē ī āḏ ē ī āḏ ē ī ē phenomenon is also attested by (Yoda 2019, p. 63) and in Bekalta too, where we find, for ā instance, ḏ ic: yāḫu nā u āḫ ah.na ḥ“we take it”. The weakening of /d/ isḏan ancient phenomenon, attested āḏḏArabic where ē ī it sometimes ḏ ē in Sicilian even passed to /l/ and the consonant has not been ē ē ē ē ē ḏArabic ā āḏ ḫḏā ā ḏ pronounced in Maltese ī 14th century (La Rosa 2019, āḫ sinceāthe pp. 116–17; Avram ḫḏā āḏp. 102).ḏ āḫ ḫḏā ā ā 2012, āḏī ē in Bekalta, ē ā ī ā interdentals ḫ ē āḫ maintained, In Monastir are generally but āḏā ā and ā āḏāin the latter, ḫḏā ā ē ḫ ē ḏā free variants and ḏ the āḏī speakers’ levels of education, āḫ oscillation, depending on ḫ ī a certain ḏ attested yāḫu ī is than thirty”, duāḫ “we take”, ā in the following ā ā cases: aktar min talātı̄naā “more āḏāic: nā ḫ ic: ē yāḫu ic: nā yāḫu yā duhāḫ “they take it”, duhāḫ “we take it”, but in the same speaker we find hādı̄ “this āḏī (m.)” āḫ ḥ ḏ āḫ hādiya ā“this (f.)”, hādākaā“that and hādāyaāḏā “this (f.)”, (m.)”, which alternates with hādāka,āḏā ā ic: yāḫu and dı̄naḏḫ“we ī took”. āḏī āū ī āḏā ʿ ū ē ǝ 3.1.2. /q/ āū ī āʿ ī as voiceless, ʿ ū In Mahdia, Monastir, Msaken and Bekalta, ē/q/ is generally pronounced ǝ but it might be realised as /g/ in the following examples: gāl ū lı̄ “they told me”, gutlak āū ī ī ā ī āḫ Ḫ ī a mang ūla “transported goods”, bagra “cow”, mungēla “watch”, ynagg@z “I told you”,īdī silʿAlī ʿ ū ē ǝ ā ī āḫ āḫ āḫ āḏī ʿAlī Ḫ ī “he jumps”, gāāʿ dı̄n “[the ones] staying”. The phenomenon was noticed also by (Attia ā ū ī āḫʿīdī ī ʿ 1969, pp. 125–26) examples that have ā āḏī ā ā been already mentioned above. As āḏā ē āḏīāḏāwho offeredǝ few ē āḫḫ ī Bouhlel Msaken, āregards ā āḏā observed that the āḏāinhabitants of the town generally pronounce ʿ ʿ ə the uvular stopāḏī /q/ as voiceless because they consider themselves as “citizens”, such as in ē ū īdī ʿAlī Ḫ ī īdī the following words: iqalla “eradicate”, yuqʿAlī ud “heḪsitsī down”, and qalb “heart”. According āḏā ʿ ʿ ū ī ī to Bouhlel, the consonant is pronounced as /g/ in some words, such as mungēla “watch” or ē ū bilgd@ “well”, and in his opinion this would be the “real” pronunciation ā ū īof the consonant. əī ī in the pronunciation of some terms, ā ū īBouhlel also shows ā ūaē īʿcertain variation ū ē such as zqūqu ūǝ and zg ūgu “pine nuts”, baqrı̄ and bagrı̄ “veal” (Bouhlel 2009, p. 127). Actually, none of the ē ǝī āʿǝ ī ē ū ī Tunisian dialects know the exclusive use of /q/ and/or /g/. If compared to the spread āū ī ū of /g/, the realisation /q/ is in fact limited and restricted only to the cities of Bizerte, ē ǝ Tunis, Sousse, Monastir, Mahdia, Sfax, and Kairouan. Mahdia is, therefore, “entouré de g” 23 Moreover, (Yoda 2008, p. 484) stated ((Mion 2015, p. 271); see the maps in (Skik 2000)). ʿ ʿ ʿ that the appearance of /g/ instead of /q/ in some words in Mahdia Arabic, as wellēas in 24 In addition to this, already in 1984, (Saada 1984, other Tunisian ē ə dialects, is very common. ē pp. 27–28) talking about the Arabic of Tozeur, stated that the existence of a /g/ sound is ū ī ēū ū ī ū ū ī Languages 2021, 6, 145 10 of 23 not a valid criterion for establishing the “non citadinité” of a dialect in Tunisia. She also added that throughout rural Tunisia, the phoneme /g/ was used for /q/, but that it was also present in some coastal zones and towns, in Judeo-Arabic and Muslim varieties, even if the Judeo-Arabic varieties of Tunisia are usually an exception and all have /q/, except Tataouine.25 Free Variants ā /k/ as /q/ In some aged inhabitants of Mahdia, among which are some fishermen, natives of the quarter Burž al-rās, /k/ is articulated as /q/ in few words or expressions, such as kif kif “the same”, pronounced qif qif, and flūqa “felucca, rowing boat”, generally attested as flūka in Tunisian Arabic.26 The term flūka is pronounced with /k/ three times in the same video by two other speakers, that is a Mahdāwı̄ poet, while reciting a poem dedicated to Mahdia, ā used a higher ā and the speaker. Both register: The poet because of the nature of the text that he was reciting and the speaker because of his role of presenter of the documentary. Therefore, their roles may have influenced their linguistic choices. Regarding previous studies on Mahdia Arabic, (Attia 1969, p. 125) did not highlight this feature, but identified an emphatic variant of /k/ indicated with /k./, such as in k.ānı̄ “I am”. 3.1.3. /r./ The phenomenon is attested in some aged fishermen natives of Mahdia, such as in the words bur.ž, of the toponym Burž al-rās, bh.ar. “sea”, r.ah.ma “mercy”, aktar. “more”, bar.r.a “out” and dār. “house”. The same informant may also pronounce some words in which /r/ is not emphasised, such as ǧārek “your neighbour”. The phenomenon has also been attested in some other mid-aged speakers, women and men, but not in all the speakers of the video analysed. The realisations of /r/ as /r/ and /r./ may also oscillate in the same informant, īdī īdī Ḫ ʿAlī ī “four”. Ḫ ī a forty-year-old female nurse from Mahdia, such as in the word ar and arba . baʿAlī The emphatic /r./ is also attested in Mahdia Arabic by (Yoda 2008, 2019). The presence of /r./ does not seem to allow fronting or raising of /a/ and /ā/. In the speakers involved in the videos analysed who do not pronounce /r./, /a/ is maintained as well and is not Ḫ dinār ī raised nor fronted, such as inīdī arbʿAlī a “four”, “dinar” and barra “out”. However, further investigation is required to verify the presence and the distribution of the phenomenon since it has been attested in few speakers, at the moment.27 Regarding Msaken Arabic, (Bouhlel 2009, p. 127) stated that, differently from some other regions of Tunisia, the rā’ is generally not “amplifié”, and is even pronounced re, such as in the words ureq “leaves”, krēheb “cars”. Bouhlel added that some exceptions are available, such as mrā“woman” and h.rābiš “pills”, but he does not explain in which conditions the phenomenon occurs. In my corpus, some cases of emphasisation of /r./ in Msaken Arabic have been attested, as well as the raising of /ā/ after /r/, such as in” krēheb “cars”, as indicated by Bouhlel. 3.1.4. De-Emphasisation Some cases of loss of emphasis have been attested in Mahdia and Bekalta in speakers of different sex and age, such as in the words atfāl “children”, tbı̄b “doctor”, musāba “infected” durūfa “conditions”. In the latter, we notice the possible shift /d/>/ d. />/d/ because of the loss of the interdental articulation. Some other examples are tufultı̄ “my childhood”, bi-sifa “in quality of”, abyad “white”, tul tul “directly, straight”, muwātin “citizen”. The phenomenon involves all the emphatics /d/, /d./, /t./ and /s./ and does not seem to affect the vowel quality, which is maintained. In the corpus of Bekalta, we also find some examples of de-emphasisation and sonorisation such as mazdar “source” and mazrah.ı̄ “theatral”, in which there is a shift /s./ > /z/ with a possible intermediate step of /s./ > /s/. The phenomenon of de-emphasisation is also attested in Kairouan, where we find, among other words, matālib “requests”.28 In a woman of Monastir, we find a de-emphasisation of /t./ realised as lightly affricated /ts/ in the exclamation yā latı̄f ! “oh my God!”. A ī Languages 2021, 6, 145 ā ā 11 of 23 ṯ light affrication of /t/, already highlighted by (Cantineau 1960, p. 37) as a feature attested ṯ in Algerian and Moroccan Arabic, generally also characterises Tunisian Arabic, but here ṯ involves emphatic consonants too.29 (Saada 1984, p. 24) identified a /ts/ sound in the speakers of some tribes of Tozeur and (Dallaji 2017, pp. 153–57) reported that in Nabeul there is a tendency to affricate /t/ that people define through the verb taštaš and the terms taštı̄š and taštaša. Furthermore, (Maamouri 1967) described the variety of Nabeul as being characterised by a strong ṯaffrication of /t/.30 As regards the loss of emphasis, it is also ā ǧ typical of Tunisian Judaeo-Arabic (Taïeb and Sayah 2003). (Cohen 1975,ṯ vol. 2, p. 14 and n. 7) states that some phenomena in Tunis Judeo-Arabic lead us to think that there must have ṯ been a period in which the articulation of emphatic consonants was stronger and “sans ā douteāplus forte qu’à Tunis musulman, ce qui expliquerait le fait que les musulmans qui veulent imiter le parler des juifs, exagèrent l’emphase en même temps que les modulations expressives de la phrase”.31 Cohen’s statement also shows that in Tunisia the weakening of ḏ the articulatory strength in pronouncing the emphatics has long been attested. However, ā ǧ the prononciation of emphatic consonants with more or less articulatory strength from different confessional groups, i.e.,āJews/Muslims, is a āphenomenon of old, present in ā ā ā because of community or identity reasons.32āḏ ī 83–84) different Arab contexts (Saada 1984,ē pp. ē noticed the phenomenon in the Arabic of Tozeur and indicated a series of conditions for its ḏ are the causes in occurrence. Further studies will be necessary to be able to indicate which ē ē Mahdia Arabic and ḏ if anyāregularity can beāḏfound. ḏ ḫḏā ā 3.1.5. Dropping of Final /n/ ḫā ē of the final /n/ā of numerals In Monastir and Mahdia, the weakening or dropping ā ā ā āḏ ūī ḏāis not followedḏby the ism al-ma īdī ʿAlī Ḫ ī be noted: īdī ʿAlī Ḫ in pausal position, that dūd, should išrı̄n mily ē ic: yāḫu Ḫ “twenty-seven”, ī Ḫ ī “twenty millions”,īdī sabʿAlī atīdī w-ʿAlī išrı̄ tmānı̄ “eighty”, amsı̄ “fifty”. The dropping of the final /n/ is an old feature, attested in Andalusi Arabic only in dual nouns (see ḏ āḫ 1995, ḥ (Ferrando pp. 50–51; Corriente et al. 2015, ḏpp. 110, 125–26). It also should be noticed ḏ feature does ā not emerge (see, āḏ for instance (Yoda ḫḏā 2019, that in Yoda’s transcriptions, this p. 63)). In Saada’s study on the Arabic of Tozeur, some consonantal dropping involving ḫ ē final /n/ have been attested, such as the cases of tnē “two”, mnē “from where”, lē “until ḏā The scholar defines ḏ Ḫ ī when”,īdī gaʿAlī dı̄ “standing”, takū “you will be”. this phenomenon, which ic: tar yāḫu in Tozeur is wider spread than in Mahdia and involves some other consonants, ı̄m, i.e., ā ī (for a more complete definition, āḫ “softening” or the process of shortening a word see (Carter āḫ only ḥ one informant uses it and thereforeḏ judges āḫ2007, p. 17), and states āḫ that āḏī this feature as in āḏā decline/regressionā (Saada 1984, pp.ā39–42). ā āḏā ḫ ī 3.1.6. Vowels According to (Attia 1969, pp. 126–27), Mahdia Arabic has five short vowels /a/, /e/, /i/, /o/, /u/ and five long vowels /ā/, /ē/, /ı̄/, /ō/ and /ū/.33 (Yoda 2008, 2019) stated ī five long vowels, andāḫ that Mahdia Arabic has three short vowels, /a/, /i/, ā/u/, ū ī āand āḫ āḫ āḏī assumed ʿthat Mahdia dialect, as an urban variety, acquired /ē/ and /ō/ as phonemes ū ē ǝ āḏā ā ā ā because of the influence of the surrounding village dialects. He also added that “Because āʿ ī ḫ ī and /ō/, Mahdāwı̄ dialect dialect is unique among the Tunisian of the existence of /ē/ sedentary dialects” (Yoda 2008, p. 489).34 Therefore, Mahdia Arabic vowel system would be made of five long vowels and five short ones for Attia, but only of three short vowels for Yoda.35 Starting from this vowel scheme, Mahdia Arabic long vowels can undergo some ʿ ʿ qualitative changes; i.e., some cases of opening of the close vowels /i/ and ā ū are ī present ē /u/ inə the varieties of the region, ʿsuch as ūin Bekalta, were we find both zı̄t “oil” and the ē variant zēt, or hōnı̄ “here” in Monastir in āʿ ī (Attia 1969, p. 129) and a certain variation is also attested ū Msaken, such as in the cases of rōh “soul” and f ūl “broad beans”. (Bouhlel 2009, p. 128) also .ī ū ī provides some minimal pairs: qūm “stand up”/ qōm “people” pejorative, kūn “be”/kōn “world”. In this section, I shall focus exclusively on the treatment of /ı̄/ when it is followed ʿ ʿ by the third person singular suffix pronouns. What emerges is that, in general, /ı̄/ + hā ē ə ū ī ī ē ē zīt “oil” and the variant zēt hōnī “here” in Monastir (Attia 1969 rōḥ “soul” and fūl “broad beans”. qūm “stand up”/ qōm “people” pejorative, kūn “be”/kōn 12 of 23 “world”. In this section, I shall focus exclusively on the treatment of /ī/ when it is followed by , in general, /ī/ + hā and /ū/ + hā are maintained, such as in mā fī hāš “there is not” (as well as in Takrouna Arabic and /ū/ + hā are maintained, such as in mā fı̄-hāš “there is not” (as well as in Takrouna Languages 2021, 6, 145 Arabic see (Marçais and Guiga 1925, p. XII, n. 2) and in Sousse, (Talmoudi 1980, p. 152)). fē hā it”“in have However, some cases of“in fē-hā it” been have attest been attested (Yoda 2008, p. 489; 2019, pp. 61, 65, fē of “infē-h it (m.)” ofand fē 66). In the videos analysed in my corpus, I found only rare cases “in it and (m.)” it (f.)” in(f.)” a speaker from Knaies, a small avillage “in it in a speaker from Knaies, small 11 village 11 km near Msaken, and in of“in fē-ha a small group of people allegedly from Mahdia. The majority of the people speaking in fī uttered fī the videos analysed, coming from Mahdia or Monastir, fı̄-h or fı̄-ha. The reduced presence of the phenomenon may be due, once again, to the linguistic levelling towards the Arabic of Tunis or of the other coastal towns of Sahel such as Sousse (see (Mion 2015, p. 272)) or to the conditioning of the medium used, which may push the speaker to use a higher register.36 Therefore, the vowel system of Mahdia seems similar to that of Monastir, which, according to (Gibson 1998, p. 276), has villageois features since it has five long vowels as in Figure 3. ṯ ṯ ṯ Figure 3. Jemmel and Monastir Vowel system, taken from (Gibson 1998, p. 276). ā ǧ AccordingtotoMarçais, Marçais,Takrouna TakrounaArabic Arabichas“une has“uneparticularité particularitéde de détail propre aux According dialectes sâh.li: l’ouverture en ē et en ō de ı̄ et de ū” that we find in Mahdia too (Marçais ḥli: l’ouverture en ē et en ō de ī et de ū” that we find in Mahdia too ( and Guiga 1925, pp. XXI–XXII). – 3.1.7. Diphthongs According to (Yoda 2008) and (Mion 2015, p. 271), the vowel system of Sahel Arabic is characterised by five long vowels, ā, ē, ı̄, ō, ū, obtained from the monophthongisation ā,ēē,and ī, ō,ō.ū,According obtained from monophthongisation of the diphthongs /ay/ and /aw/ in to thethe traditional categories of ofclassification, the diphthongs /ay/ and /aw/ in ē and ō. According to the traditional categories of Hilali clasā ā Hilali and pre-Hilali features, which contrast some allegedly in the ā āḏ while theēpassage ī of /ay/ > /ı̄/ system, /ay/ and /aw/ would be reduced to ē and ō, /ay/ and /aw/ would be reduced to ē and ō, while the passage of /ay/ > /ī/ /aw/ >is and /aw/ > /ū/ would be typical of the pre-Hilali dialects. Actually, the and situation /ū/ would be typical of the pre ḏ more complex than this, because, as (Mion 2015, p. 271) showed, the reduction of the iphthongs to ē and ō ē diphthongs to ē and ō “is shared by both /q/ and /g/ varieties”. ēAs already dealt above, “is shared by both /q/ and /g/ varieties”. As already dealt above, the pronunciation of /q/ ḏthe pronunciation ā āḏ the main criterion ḫḏā for establishing whether ā of /q/ has been a dialect had Bedouin or sedentary features, but Mion and some other scholars have raised doubts about ḫ ē emerges from my corpus, the realisation of the validity of this principle.37 Based on what ḏā ḏ etymological diphthongs is usually sedentary in Mahdia, in Monastir and in Bekalta, such ic: yāḫu as in the following cases: al-yūm “today” (Tlelsa), ı̄r “better”, d.ı̄f “guest”. Even if (Yoda yūm “today” (Tlelsa), ḫīr “better”, ḍīf “guest”. 2019, p. 59, n. 9) states that the diphthongs in Mahdia are usually reduced to /ē/ and /ō/, diphthongs in my Mahdia are and /ō/, thethe cases identified/ay/ in ḥthat ḏsimilarreduced the the cases identified in corpus areusually to those to of /ē/ Sousse, where diphthongs and /aw/ are reduced to /ı̄/ and /ū/ (Talmoudi 1980, p. 55). Some other existing studies toon/ī/Sahel and varieties /ū all go in the same direction; for instance, to recount it with Marçais’ words regarding the Arabic of Takrouna, “Comme les dialectes congénères du Sâh.el, le takroûni y suit sur quelques points des voies propres qui, l’éloignant des parlers citadins de la Régence, le rapprochent de certains dialectes bédouins du Maghréb oriental [ . . . ]: les diphtongues ī non en finale absolue s’y āḫ réduisent généralement à ē anciennes ai et au accentuéesā et āḫ et ō” (Marçais and Guiga 1925, pp. XXI–XXII).38 As (D’Annaāḏī 2020, pp. 88–89) showed, in ā ā ā āḏā are reduced to /ē/ Chebba, a small village 35 km south of Mahdia, etymological diphthongs and /ō/ and are occasionally partially diphthongised. According to (Bouhlel 2009, p. 128), in Msaken Arabic, the diphthongs /aw/ can be reduced to /o/ in many terms, i.e., lōn ḏ ā ā ē āḫ āḫ āḏā ḫ ī ʿ ū āū ī ē ǝ points des voies propres qui, l’éloignant des parlers citadins de la Régence, le rapprochent ā de certains dialectes bédouins du Maghréb oriental […]: les diphtongues anciennes ai et au accentuées et non en finale absolue s’y réduisent généralement à ē et ō” ( ḏ – D’Anna 2020 – lage 35 km south of Mahdia, etymological diphthongs are reduced to /ē/ and /ō/ and are Languages 2021, 6, 145 13 of 23 ā ā ṯ ā ā ā āḏ ē ī lōn “color”, mōz “banaṯ ṯ ē nas”, dōra “tour”. ṯ ṯ “color”, mōz “bananas”, dōra “tour”. The situation seems to be quite complex since, ḏonce ṯ more, it is clear that Mahdia Arabic is an urban dialect surrounded by mixed or contact ē ḏ ā ā varieties, which can influence it in different ways and atāḏ different levels.39ḫḏā Imāla 3.1.8. Imāla ḫ ē imāla ā ǧ ḏā ḏ Several cases of final imāla, etymological or not, have all“he positions hnē “here”, ʿalē “on/upon”, mšēbeen “he found went”,in ḫdē took” in ā ǧ ic: yāḫu īdī ʿAlī Ḫ ī Mahdia and the nearby towns: hnē “here”, alē “on/upon”, mšē “he went”, dē “he took” ēni “I” ((Yoda 2019, pp. 59, 63); see also (Attia 1969, p. 130)), At the moment, the pronoun ēni “I” imāla šadīda āḫ šadı̄da ḥ ḏ is the only case of imāla found in Mahdia and Monastir. (Bouhlel 2009, p. 127) added mī “water” and smī “sky”. some Imālaother examples attested in Msaken Arabic, such as mı̄ “water” and smı̄ “sky”. Imāla is a phenomenon shared by many Tunisian vernaculars. (Gibson p. 279), mšā “he went” and 1998, mšāt “she ḏ for instance, analysed the pronunciation of the verbal forms mšā “he went” and mšāt “she went” and stated that in Sousse the average vowel ɛ ḏ went” and stated that ɛin Sousse the average vowel of the feminine form is /E/ and those of ā are /E/ and /e/. He ā added that among his Sousse informants, nobody the masculine form /ē/ as the tense ā āḏ only one ā ā ā ā ē ī ā ī speaker uttered a long /e/, while in Monastir, there was /ē/ yaspasse theāḫ tense Arabic “ā accentué en finalewith absolue à ā ā affirmed that inā Takrouna āḏ y passe ē ī ē vowel. Marçais Arabic “ā accentué en finale absolue āḫ āḫ peu près constamment a ē” – imālaāḏīà ē āḏā ḏ peu près constamment a ē” (Marçais and Guiga 1925, pp. XXI–XXII). The feature of imāla is ā the /ā/ is affected ā ā by imāla āḏā Arabic, ē all positionsḏ(Cohen also shared by ḫTunisian Judeo-Arabic, the /ā/ is affected byē imāla in ī ē ē ḏ ā 2, p. 56).40 āḏ ḫḏā ā 1975, vol. ḏ ā āḏ ḫḏā ā — 3.1.9. Raising of Final—a ḫ ē ē ḏāMahdia Arabic ḏis also characterised by the raising of the finalḫfeminine ā ū īsingular ending – ḥdūde “limited”, ḫ ḏ “five”, “human”, ḏā ic: yāḫu –a such as in the cases ofʿ mah.dūde “limited”, amse “five”, insaniyye “human”,ē bnayye “child ū ǝ “child (f.)”. There is a role played by syntactic elements since we also find ḫyāḫu ṣġār “five ic: (f.)”. There is a role played by syntactic elements since we also find amsa s ġār “five . āʿ ī in ḍāfa children”, with the numeral āḫ ḥ ḏ id.āfa. The presence of emphatic and pharyngal consonants children”, with the numeral in āḫ raising. ḥ ḏ usually blocks this 3.2. Nominal Morpho-Syntax 3.2.1. Personal Pronouns āḫ ʿ āʿ ī ū ʿ ē The existing ə studies on the personal pronouns of Tunisian Arabic show a complex ī situation, which can beāsummarised in Figure 4: āḫ āāḏī ī āḫ āḫ ū ī ī āḫ āḫ āḏī ā ā ā āḏā āḏā ā ā ā āḏā ḫ ī āḏā ḫ ī ə ʿ ū āū ī ʿ āʿ ī ū ē ǝ āū ī ē ʿ Figure 4. Distribution ʿ of the first p. sing., second p. sing., first p. plu. of the personal pronouns in ʿ ʿ ē Sahel Arabic (Mion 2015, p. 274). ē Mion, əin his paper Réfléxions sur la catégorie des «parlers villageois» en arabe tunisien, ū offered of the first singular and plural personal pronouns “I” and “we” and ī a brief sketch ī of the second ūsingular person “you” on gender opposition in the pronominal ī and focused ī system. If the village and Bedouin dialects share the presence of gender opposition in the second person singular, according to Marçais’ classification, the urban varieties do not (Marçais 1950, p. 208). With respect to this element, in Mahdia Arabic, there is no gender distinction in pronouns and verbs, as well as in Monastir, Msaken and Bekalta. So, the situation could be represented as follows in Table 1. ǝ ū ū ā ā ī ī ī ā ā ī ī ā ā ī ā ā ī ī ā ā ī ī ī ā ī 14 of 23 ī ī ā ā ṯ 1 p. s. Mahdia ä¯ ni ī Monastir ä¯ ni Msaken ä¯ ni Bekalta ä¯ ni/āni 1 p. p. ah.na/nah.na ah.na ah.na/nah.na nah.na 2 p. s. @nti/inti41 @nti @nti @nti/inti īī īAs for the first-person plural “we”, ahna is the main pronoun used and nahna seldom . . ī alternates. Therefore, further studies are needed to check whether this is due to the origin of theī speakers interviewed in the videos analysed. In (Yoda 2019, p. 65), h.na is also attested when preceded by a vowel such as in the expression tawwa-h.na “now we”. ṯ The first person singular “I” generally shows a final imāla šadı̄dā.42 Moreover, Takrouna ṯ ā shows ī ä¯ ni “I”, which according to Marçais is original to the variety, Arabic the pronoun and also presents the variants nä¯ ya and nä¯ y, which have been imported later (Marçais and ī 43 As regards Msaken, (Bouhlel 2009, pp. 130–31) indicates āni ā 1925, pp. XXII–XXIII). Guiga ṯ ā “me” and with the meaning of “I” and the second person singular pronoun inti “you”. ṯ 3.2.2. Relative Pronouns ā ā ā ḏ ā ḏ ḏā ā ā āḫ āā ā ʿ ā ī ī ā ī Pronoun ā ū ā ī āā ā ī Table 1. Personal pronouns in Mahdia, Monastir, Msaken and Bekalta. ā ā ā ī Languages 2021, 6, 145 ā ā āḫ ḏā ʿ In my corpus, in all the towns and villages considered in this study, the only relative pronoun used is ellı̄ and the variants illı̄ ((Yoda 2019, p. 61) has illi) and lı̄ when the preceding word ends in a vowel. The relative pronoun ella, defined as “villageois” by Marçais, has not ā ā ǧ been ā attested at the moment ((Marçais 1950, p. 211); for Chebba, see (D’Anna 2020, p. 90)). Other varieties of Tunisian Sahel, such as the dialect of Sousse, also have the variants ellı̄ and llı̄, used when āthe relative is preceded by a word ending in a vowel (Talmoudi 1980, pp. 146–47).44 ā ā 3.2.3. Numeralsāḏ ē ī īdī ʿAlī ī īdī ʿAlī Ḫ ī(Yoda 2019, p. 66), xams In numbers 3 to 10, the ism al-ma dūd is Ḫ plural: ašra yyām ḏ tlāta yyām “three days” (Yoda 2019, pp. 60, 63), tlāta īdī ʿAlī Ḫ ī askar “three iyyām “five days” and ṯ ā Ḫ“four ā ē īdī ʿAlī Ḫīē ī soldiers” soldiers” and īdī arb a ʿAlī askar ((Yoda 2019, p. 59); for Tunis Arabic, see (Biţuna ṯ ā ā āḏ āḏ the nounē dı̄nār ī ḫḏāalready noticed by Biţuna ā 2011)).ā45 As for Tunis Arabic, “dinars” is always ē used as a singular in Mahdia Arabic too (see (Biţuna 2011) and (Yoda 2019, p. 63)).46 ḏ same form that they have in ḫ In ē Mahdia Arabic, numerals from 11 to 19 have the ē tāš “thirteen”, ē ḏ īdī ʿAlī Tunisian Arabic in general, that is h.dāš “eleven”, tnāš “twelve”, tlut arba at.āš Ḫ ī .. ḏ “fourteen”, ā āḏ ḫḏā ā ic: yāḫu Ḫ ī ums..tāš “fifteen”, [email protected]̄š “sixteen”, īdī sabʿAlī at.āš “seventeen”, tmūnt.āš “eighteen” Ḫ ī andīdī tsaʿAlī at.āš “nineteen” (some numerals are present in (Yoda 2019): passim). One of the ḫ ē ḏ main evident characteristics is the disappearance īdī/ʿAlī ī of the pharyngeal / or itsḪassimilation ḏā (Biţuna 2011, ḏp. 32). These numbers from 11 to 19 are usually followed by a to the /t/ yāḫu īdī ʿAlī Ḫ ī years”ic: īdī ʿAlī Ḫ ī years”. It is worth singular, such as in tnāš ām “eleven and amst.āš@n ām “fifteen noting the form tlut..tāš@n el-snā “eighteen years”, followed by a determined singular noun. āḫ ḥ Some other examples, taken from ḏ Yoda’s texts, are xums..tāš-in yōm and xmus..tāš-in yōm “fifteen days” (Yoda 2019, pp. 65, 66), attested in the same speaker. It is well known that āī āḫ numerals 11 to 19 show an -n form when in direct annexation with in Maghribi dialects, ā ʿAlī Ḫ ī theīdī ma dūd ((Marçais 1977, p. 178); for Tunis Arabic, see (Biţuna 2011, p. 32)). In fact, in āḏī āḏ ē ī19 Sousse, numerals from 11 to ā ā āḏāalso have an –n final shape when in id.āfa (see (Talmoudi 1980, p. 169)). Concord from 20, in Mahdia Arabic, reflects the rules of fus.h.ā too, such as in ḏḪ “twenty ā ī days” ((Yoda 2019, p. 65); āḫ for Tunis Arabic, (Biţuna 2011, ī the casesīdī of ʿAlī išrı̄n yōm ē soldiers” ((Yoda 2019, īdī ʿAlī Ḫ īē hundred p. 34))āḫand mya askar “one āḏī p. 59); for Maghribi Arabic, āfor Tunis Judeo-Arabic, (Cohen 1975, see (Marçais āḏāāḏ ā ḫḏā 1977, pp. 173–80), ā ā āḏāp. 232); for Takrouna 47 ḫ ī Arabic see also Marçais; (Marçais and Guiga 1925): passim). āū ī ḫ ēThe tendency towards weakening or to let the final /n/ drop in tens, in the towns ē ǝ ḏ considered in this analysis, has already been dealt with above; some other cases involving yāḫu īdī ʿAlī Ḫ ī dozensic:are amsı̄ “fifty” and arba ı̄ “fourty”. ʿḏ āʿ ī āū ī ū ē ē ǝ Languages 2021, 6, 145 15 of 23 3.3. Verbal Morpho-Syntax 3.3.1. An Urban Conjugation ā Verbs in the Arabic variety of Mahdia and the surrounding towns, that is Monastir, Msaken and Bekalta, are generally conjugated according to the stem yimši/yimšı̄w and yaqra/yaqrāw, traditionally defined as pre-Hilali (Marçais and Guiga 1925, p. 49 and passim; Marçais 1950, p. 209)48 as well as in other urban varieties of Sahel, such as Sousse and Sfax (Sellami 2019, pp. 86–87, Sellami 2019; Herin and Zammit 2017, p. 143). Some examples are yemšı̄w “they go”, naqrāw “we read”, nalqāw “we find”, netmannēw “we hope”, nistennēw “we wait for” (see also Yoda 2019, pp. 59, 66)49 . Even if data for Mahdia Arabic seem to be clear, as (Mion 2018, pp. 117–18) pointed out, for Sahel, the issue cannot be reduced to the simple opposition pre-Hilali/Hilali conjugation, since a large part of Tunisian varieties have mixed features with plural perfect conjugation in -āw and imperfect in –ū, i.e., mšāw/yamšu (see also (Mion 2015, pp. 272–73)).50 3.3.2. Feminine Third Person Singular of Weak-Final Verbs In Mahdia, Monastir, Bekalta and Msaken, the feminine third person singular of the perfect tense has a long vowel and –ā-t ending, also showing imāla, such as in the following īdītaʿAlī Ḫ īpassed”. The long vowel, preserved as in the so-called addēt “she cases: mšēt “she went”; pre-Hilali dialects, has been also attested by (Yoda 2019, p. 65) in xdāt “she took” and īdī ʿAlī Ḫ gave”. ī In addition, the surrounding urban varieties have similar features (see .tāt “she Talmoudi 1980, pp. 86–88).51 3.3.3. Perfect Tense Pattern Similar to the other urban dialects, Mahdia Arabic does not show gender opposition at the feminine second person singular @nti of the perfect tense, just like the other urban varieties of Sahel such as Msaken (Bouhlel 2009, p. 131), Sousse (Talmoudi 1980, pp. 77–78) and Sfax (Lajmi 2009, p. 138; see also (Mion 2015, p. 273)). Gender opposition at the second person singular “you”, in fact, is maintained only in conservative52 Bedouin or village dialects in which the feminine person has the desinence –ti (Marçais 1977, p. 36). 3.3.4. Use of the Verb rā In the Arabic of Mahdia, the verb to see is expressed through the verb šāf “to see, to look at, to watch”, common to a wide variety of Arabic dialects,53 and rā “to see”. Additionally, in Sfaxi Arabic, the two verbs alternate with a certain predominance of rā (Lajmi 2009, p. 140; Zammit 2014, p. 34; Sellami 2019) and, in Sousse, the verb rā is used, but with a peculiarity, that is the first person singular of the perfect tense rūt (Talmoudi 1980) and not rı̄t, as in Kairouan and Mahdia. Among the examples, we find rı̄tuš? “have not you seen it?” (Yoda 2019, p. 66). In Mahdia Arabic, šāf is very used, as in the cases of šūf, šāf (Yoda 2019, pp. 60, 63, 66). In Tunis Judeo-Arabic, the verb rā is used and it has maintained the dipthongation /ay/ (Cohen 1975, p. 106). From an historical perspective, the verb rā replaced šāf in Sicilian Arabic, in Sicilian Judeo-Arabic and in Maltese. Moreover, it was very productive in Andalusi Arabic too (La Rosa 2019, p. 259; Burgaretta 2016, p. 89; Corriente et al. 2017, pp. 508–9, for šāf, p. 742). 3.3.5. Passive The passive form of verbs is usually expressed through an initial t- pattern, used in Tunisia and in other Maghribi varieties (see, i.e., (Cohen 1975, pp. 123–25)), “né, sans doute, sous l’influence analogique des réfléchis-passifs à t- initial des thèmes V et VI, procédant respectivement des thèmes II et V, ce thème procède de verbes du thème fondamental généralement en usage. Il en constitue le réfléchi-passif” (Marçais 1977, p. 66).54 Languages 2021, 6, 145 16 of 23 The following examples have been attested in Mahdia, Bekalta, Monastir and Msaken: t@bnat “it was built”; yitnah.h.a “it is removed”, yitfahem “it is understood”, [email protected] fuq al-rās “it is placed on the head”, tut.fı̄ “it switches off”, mā tut.fiš “it does not switch off” (for the phenomenon in Sfaxi Arabic, see (Sellami 2019)).55 4. Discussion and Conclusions ā Marçais (1950, p. 214) stated that the Tunisian Sahel is characterised by sedentary varieties, which break the continuum of Sulaymi dialects and divided Bedouin Tunisian dialects into two main groups: Hilali and Sulaymi. According to this kind of classification, the features of Mahdia Arabic would have some characteristics attributable to the Banū Hilāl, such as the imāla of internal vowels, the masculine singular third person pronoun suffix –u, opposed to the suffix –a(h) of the Sulaymi group and the passive in t-. Some Sulaymi features would be the weaker articulation of emphasis and the final imāla (see (Marçais 1950, p. 217; Ritt-Benmimoun 2014, p. 354; Taine-Cheikh 2017, pp. 20–21). However, Ritt-Benmimoun’s studies on the Bedouin Arabic of South Tunisia have showed that the categorisation Hilali/Sulaymi is not always definite and obvious and led us to wonder whether “there is a real zone of transition between areas where the S and the H dialects are spoken or if these areas are separated by a more or less well-defined boundary, perhaps corresponding exactly to the settlement area of the different tribes” (Ritt-Benmimoun 2014, p. 358). In 2017, Taine-Cheikh pointed out that Marçais’ criteria of dialect classification had to be revisited and stated: Reste, me semble-t-il, une question, celle de la valeur de la distinction entre parlers ī existe bien de groupes de parlers plus ou moins hilaliens vs sulaymites vs īdī maʿAlī qiliens.ḪS’il différenciés et s’il est nécessaire de leur attribuer un nom, je ne suis pas sûre que ces trois désignations d’origine socio-historique soient d’une réelle précision et donc, d’une véritable secours (Taine-Cheikh 2017, p. 38).56 Guerrero (2018) revisited the idea of the villageois category in which the rural Tunisian dialects are generally included, and based on 20 phonological, morpho-syntactic and lexical features, demonstrated that they show important differences from the Algerian and Moroccan varieties, which, instead, constitute a group with consistent features. (Benkato 2019, pp. 11–12) pointed out that the classifications of Bedouin dialects, and particularly Sulaymi dialects, derived from W. Marçais’ statements, arose in turn from de Slane and G. Marçais’ assumptions, were “taken as fact”, even if the scholar did not offer any genealogy of these tribes. Benkato added that “these categories were hardly based on sound linguistic argumentation and instead more on the personal experience and reputation for their creators” (Benkato 2019, p. 14). For all these reasons, Marçais’ traditional criteria of classification therefore cannot be applied tout court to the analysis of Mahdia Arabic. That is, it is not possible nor methodologically appropriate to attribute a precise and certain origin to all of its features. In spite of this, the first data presented in this contribution confirm that Mahdia Arabic is a sedentary variety showing some “contact” features. According to the traditional classification, typical sedentary traits are the voiceless articulation of /q/, the relative pronoun ellı̄ and the conjugation pattern mšēw/yemšı̄w. As regards the latter, it is useful to stress what (Mion 2018, p. 118) claimed: Alors que -ı̄w du Maroc à la Tunisie doit être vue comme sédentaire et citadin, un système transversal avec un parfait –/āw/ et imparfait –/ū/ est en réalité bien plus fréquent que ce que la simple opposition méthodologique pré-hilalien/hilalien laisserait entendre. Si ce système doit être conçu comme transitoire au sein d’un continuum don’t les deux pôles seraient justement les typologies pré-hilalien/hilalien, alors une bonne partie de la Tunisie (à l’exception de ses métropoles et des variétés Marāzı̄g) devrait être considérée paradoxalement comme une zone de transition.57 Languages 2021, 6, 145 17 of 23 Some “contact” features attested in Mahdia Arabic are the final etymological imāla, and the opening of /ı̄/ towards /ē/ in the particle fı̄ followed by the personal suffix pronoun –hā. However, the situation does not always seem to be clear and definite since sedentary dialects also share many elements with Bedouin Hilali dialects, such as the following used in Mahdia region: The pronoun for the third person masculine singular –u, and the realisation of final /ı̄/ and /ū/ as /e/ and /o/, when followed by the pronoun –hā, which “is not considered as an isogloss marking either Bedouin or sedentary varieties. However, it is attested in dialects not generally considered as ‘rural’” (D’Anna 2020, p. 93). According to Ritt-Benmimoun: The affinity of the H [Hilali] dialects with Tunisia’s sedentary dialects can be found in Philippe Maarçais’ statement that in the regions with a prevalence of H dialects sedentary dialects had originally been spoken which were subsequently overlaid by Bedouin dialects (Ritt-Benmimoun 2014, p. 355). As regards the reduction of diphthongs to /ē/ and /ō/, which is generally considered to be a Bedouin feature, is attested by (Yoda 2019) in Mahdia Arabic, but is not much attested in my corpus where, instead, a strong presence of /ı̄/ and /ū/ is noticed. Therefore, further investigation will shed new light on the real attestation and distribution of this feature. Besides, some of the main sedentary features of Mahdia Arabic are also shared by the so-called villageois varieties, such as the voiceless realisation of /q/,58 the final etymological imāla šadı̄da, the lack of gender opposition in verbs and pronouns and the long vowel –ā in the desinence –ā-t of the feminine third person singular of final-weak verbs (Marçais 1950, pp. 207–12). From a diachronic point of view, some elements pointed out in previous studies offer a sketch of a slightly different variety of Mahdia Arabic. For instance, in 1969, Attia observes that /d/ “remplace l’interdentale /d/ qui a disparu du parler de Mahdia” (Attia 1969, p. 123) and in 2008, Yoda identifies a series of phenomena, which in my corpus are not so obvious, such as the presence of fē-ha or the reduction of diphthongs to /ē/ and /ō/. These and other traits suggest a possible explication, that is that the Arabic of Mahdia is undergoing a change, a sort of linguistic levelling or standardisation towards the Arabic of the capital Tunis and, probably, also through the influence of the main city of Sahel, together with Sfax, Sousse, which is only 60 km away. As already shown above, Gibson’s research goes in this direction59 as well as Mion’s observations about a series of phenomena that, in a certain way, contribute to create this situation of standardisation not only in Sahel Arabic, but more generally in Tunisian Arabic. Among these factors, I find particularly interesting the role of the media, and above all, television, that Mion considers a facilitator for the diffusion of Modern Standard Arabic to all the social strata. Television is therefore responsible for the reintroduction of some phonemes in people’s speech, such as the hamza and the voiceless articulation of /q/,60 and also for the new diffusion of the –āw/ı̄w perfect tense endings. Moreover, it helped the spread of the prestigious dialectal Arabic of the capitals, such as the Tunisian of Tunis (Mion 2018, p. 120).61 The fact that the aged fishmen natives of Burž al-rās, interviewed in the already-mentioned documentary on this quarter, all pronounce the interdental /d/ as /d/ confirm Attia’s observations and lead us to consider this feature as a confirmation of the linguistic levelling in progress, above all among the youngest and more educated inhabitants of Mahdia. According to (Sayahi 2019, p. 237), the fact that in recent years the institutions often choose to utter their official speeches in Tunisian Arabic fostered the use of the dialect in the public space for public communications and not only for private or semi-private occasions (on this subject, see also (La Rosa 2018)). Moreover, I believe that the diffusion of the use the smartphone has been crucial, above all after the 2011 Arab Spring(s). In fact, thanks to it, the internet has become more accessible to a large part of the population. Easy and cheap access to the internet has allowed the acquisition and the circulation of information from far-off places within the country and abroad. Thanks to the use of social media, such as Facebook and WhatsApp, or the use of Languages 2021, 6, 145 18 of 23 YouTube, the spread of several forms of oral and written artistic forms and cultures has become more and more easy.62 What is most important here is that the linguistic contact between people from different regions of Tunisia, speaking different varieties of Arabic, has become easier too. I think that this has helped the linguistic levelling process in progress by bringing people together, in spite of the geographical distance. Furthermore, we should also take into consideration that the role of the migration movements inside Tunisia and abroad (see (D’Anna 2017) regarding the Sicilian community of Mazara, mainly consisting of Tunisians from Mahdia and Chebba) for study and work reasons may have had particular relevance in the levelling of some linguistic features contained in the varieties of Sahel. In fact, “migration from the cuntryside to cities has constituted the most significant demographic change in the last two centuries. Linguistic contact in cities is more intense and involves faster changes than in rural areas. [ . . . ] In recent decades, a significant increase in the frequency and variety of types of interdialectal and intra-dialectal contact occurred causing faster and greater degrees of levelling” (Vicente 2019, p. 106). Linguistic levelling is also evident in the town, which is probably most affected by migration movements among those mentioned in this study, i.e., Msaken. As (Bouhlel 2009, p. 133) already pointed out, in fact, Msaken Arabic underwent a deep change during the last 50 or 70 years, affecting mainly, but not exclusively, lexicon. In addition to this, as shown above, the medium used for the interviews in my corpus has a crucial role since, to a certain extent and in many cases, it conditions the speaker who knows that he/she is being filmed or recorded and, therefore, tends to use linguistic structures and/or a lexicon belonging to a higher register, that is the standard variety, be it Modern Standard Arabic or Standard Dialect.63 Funding: This paper contains the first results of a research project, titled “Lahǧāt Wilāyat al-Mahdiyya: proposte di descrizione e classificazione”, which is part of the line of research “Starting Grant”, of the “Piano di incentivi per la ricerca di Ateneo 2020/2022 (Pia.ce.ri.)”, funded by the University of Catania. Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable. Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable. Data Availability Statement: Not applicable. Conflicts of Interest: The author declares no conflict of interest. Notes 1 2 “We consider here those of the towns and small cities of the Sahel [ . . . ] which have not yet been investigated”. English translation is mine. “The Arabic language of Takroûna is generally consistent with that of the agricultural centres, towns and villages that dot the coastal region of central Tunisia, commonly called Sâh.el [ . . . ] since the Middle Ages. Separated from each other by differences in detail, these varieties belong, as far as phonetics and grammar are concerned, to the same general type of which takroûni is only a particular variety”. English translation is mine. 3 I would like to thank Giuliano Mion for reading these pages and for giving me some precious suggestions. I am also grateful to the anonymous reviewers for their suggestions that allowed me to enrich this paper. Any possible imprecision or mistake is, of course, my responsibility. 4 For an analysis and classification of the urban dialects in the Arab world, see (Vicente 2019, p. 106). 5 It is what Marçais called “différences de detail” among the dialects of Sahel that we need to describe better, of course, through a team work which will need future studies and the joint commitment of different scholars. 6 On the use of this term, see (Benkato 2019, p. 9). 7 http://www.commune-mahdia.gov.tn/en accessed on 1 August 2021. 8 During the Turkish domination in Tunisia (but also in Algeria), this term, originally meaning ‘son of a slave’ or ‘son of a Janissary’, indicated the population deriving from the marriage of Turks and local women. Many of them were occupied in agriculture or in the local army. Afterwards, they merged with the local population. See Ed. Kul-Oghlu, in (Bearman et al. 1986, vol. 5, p. 366). 9 https://www.planetware.com/tourist-attractions-/mahdia-tun-md-md.htm accessed on 1 August 2021. 10 Regarding the narration of historical sources on Banū Hilāl as destroyers of the Maghrib, see (Benkato 2019, pp. 5–6, n. 8). Languages 2021, 6, 145 ā 19 of 23 11 http://www.commune-monastir.gov.tn/web/fr/about_ville accessed on 1 August 2021. 12 http://www.commune-msaken.gov.tn/date.php.html accessed on 1 August 2021. 13 The few studies available on this town are now dated and no map is available in the website of the Commune de Msaken. Even in Medieval sources, the town is less mentioned than Mahdia or Monastir, when it is not mentioned at all. ā It should be noted that for the writing of this contribution I have not included the analysis of speeches performed in a semi-formal style or in mixed Arabic. For Mixed varieties see, among others, (Larcher 2001; Den Heijer 2012), and the Proceedings of the AIMA symposia and relative bibliography: (Lentin and GrandHenry 2008; Zack and Schippers 2012; Bettini and Spisa 2012). 14 15 16 17 These elements will be discussed below. Baqalt.a, commonly known as Bekalta, is a village 10 km from Mahdia, belonging to the Wilāyat al-Munastı̄r. I would like to point out that, in this contribution, my main focus will be Mahdia Arabic and I will only make some brief mentions fo the surrounding varieties. The focus on the latter will be developed in further studies. 18 See the interesting observations of (Van-Mol 2010, pp. 70–77) on satellite tv broadcasts and Nguyen (2021) statements on using social media for dialect research which are partially applicable here. 19 (Yoda 2019) defines the appearance of interdentals a classicism. I believe that not only Standard Arabic, but also the Arabic of the capital, Tunis, or of nearby Sousse, influence this realization of interdentals (see (Gibson 2002)). It must be pointed out that (Saada 1984, p. 23) stated that the Arabic of Tozeur had “conservation des interdentales à de rares exceptions [ . . . ] dans īdī ʿAlī Ḫ ī les quartiers des Ulä¯ d el Hä¯ def et des Žima les interdentale sont faibles chez les sujets masculins et féminins” [“retention of īdī ʿAlī Ḫ interdentals ī interdentals with rare exceptions [ . . . ] in the Ulä¯ d el Hä¯ def and Žima districts are weak in both men and women speakers”. English translation is mine]. See also the note 2 at the same page. 20 Note that I have chosen to transcribe the article al- with the lateral /l/ also when it is followed by a solar consonant, such as in the cases of al-tēnı̄ (to be read at-tēnı̄), al-tēniya (to be read at- tēniya), and al-rās (to be read ar- rās). 21 (Biţuna 2011, p. 28) notes a certain “instability” in the articulation of the interdentals in numerals from 3 to 10. Maura Tarquini gave a paper titled “Le (inter)dentali in arabo tunisino” during the “Prima giornata di dialettologia maghrebina” (Cagliari, 16/05/2019) which has not yet been published. 22 See also (Vicente 2019, pp. 107–8). 23 Eventual further information about the occurrence of /q/ and /g/ in Mahdia region will emerge from the interviews that I will carry out as soon as possible, when the sanitary emergency allows it. 24 For Sfaxi Arabic, see (Lajmi 2009, p. 136). Kerkenna Arabic is a /q/ dialect, except for Mellita variety: see (Herin and Zammit 2017, pp. 140, 142–43). 25 As underlined also by other scholars, such as Yoda, the Judeo-Arabic of Tunis shares some features with Mahdia Arabic. Therefore, Cohen’s study on this variety will be taken into account in this paper. 26 See https://tunico.acdh.oeaw.ac.at/dictionary.html?query=flk accessed on 13 August 2021. It is impossible to indicate here all of the videos analyzed for this research, but it may be useful to point out that these data are taken from a documentary realized by Menara Fm in December 2020, dedicated to the quarter of Burž al-rās. It is a 35-min documentary in which examples of many other features described in this paper can be retraced. However, further studies will be needed to clarify the presence and the distribution of the articulation of /k/ as /q/ in Mahdia and the surrounding towns. 27 It is well known, however, that in Tunisian Arabic the opposition /r/ and /r./ is well established and attested: see (Cohen 1975, vol. 2, pp. 14–15) and (Saada 1984, p. 26). 28 Out of my own concern for completeness (as far as possible, since a single contribution is far from being an exhaustive study) of information, I have listened to some videos with speakers from Kairouan, taken from Radio Monastir, which have not been inserted in my “official” corpus. 29 On the status of emphasis in Arabic see (Cohen 1969; Ghazeli 1981; Gouma 2013). 30 As far as I know, there are no systematic studies on the degrees of affrication of dental consonants in Tunisian Arabic. Further studies would allow the phenomenon to be described better. 31 “without any doubt stronger than in Muslim Tunis, which would explain the fact that Muslims who want to imitate Jewish speech exaggerate the emphasis as well as the expressive modulations of the sentence”. English translation is mine. 32 On the notion of articulatory strength, see for instance (Ladefoged and Maddieson 1996, pp. 95–97). About the influence of the communitarian and identitary dynamics on the Arabic language, see (Mion 2017) on Cypriot Arabic. It should be noticed that in Sicily, which showed a complex cultural and religious situation, according to (Lentin 2006/2007, p. 76), “Les «emphatiques» semblent avoir été articulée sans (grande) emphase” [“The ‘emphatics’ seem to have been articulated without (much) emphasis”. English translation is mine]. 33 What (Attia 1969, p. 127) stated about /e/ should be noted: “C’est une voyelle semi-ouverte, avant, brève. Elle représente entre /a/ et /i/ un degré d’aperture absent en Arabe classique. Son absence est distinctive, mais sa longueur ne le semble pas. Allongée, elle tend à se confondre avec le degré d’aperture voisin /i/ ou /a/” [“It is a semi-open, front, short vowel. It represents a degree of aperture between /a/ and /i/ which is absent in classical Arabic. Its absence is distinctive, but its length does not ī Languages 2021, 6, 145 20 of 23 ī 34 seem to be distinctive. Elongated, it tends to merge with the nearby aperture degree /i/ or /a/”. English translation is mine] and about /o/: “C’est une voyelle semi-ouverte, arrière, brève. Elle représente entre /a/ et /u/ un degré d’aperture absent en Arabe classique. Son absence ne semble pas distinctive. Allongée, elle tend à se confondre avec le degré d’aperture voisin /a/ ou /u/” [“It is a semi-open, back, short vowel. It represents a degree of aperture between /a/ and /u/ which is absent in classical Arabic. Its absence does not seem distinctive. Elongated, it tends to merge with the nearby aperture degree /a/ or /u/”. English translation is mine]. For Attia, these two phonemes in Arabic could only be short (see Attia 1969, pp. 128–29). ā ā Mahdia ī For the vowel system of Tunisian Judeo-Arabic, see (Cohen 1975, vol. 2, 56–62). 35 Describing in detail the vowel system of Mahdia Arabic is beyond the scope of this article and will be the subject of future studies. I limit myself to observe that, as shown in the examples given in this paper, in my corpus some cases of /@/ have been found. On the vocalism of Maghribi Arabic see among others the recent observations of (Mion 2018, pp. 112–13) and the relative bibliography. 36 In fact, (Yoda 2019, p. 61, n. 32) states with certainty: “when theāpreposition fi ‘in’ ī is followed by the suffix pronoun –ha, the vowels of these two phonemes assimilate to each other: ē > fē-he”. For the phenomenon in the Arabic of Tozeur, see (Saada 1984, pp. 32–33). 37 For the reduction of etymological diphthongs in Tunis Judeo-Arabic, see (Cohen 1975, vol. 2, p. 68). 38 “Like the conspecific dialects of Sâh.el, takroûni follows on some points its own paths which, distancing it from the urban dialects of the Regency, bring it closer to certain Bedouin dialects of the eastern Maghreb [ . . . ]: the old diphthongs ai and au, accented and not in final position, are generally reduced to ē and ō”. English translation is mine. 39 In Sfaxi Arabic, diphthongs are reduced to /ı̄/, /ū/ or /ō/ and in Sellami (2019)’s sample they were retained. The scholar also shows that there is a generational difference in how youngsters and aged speakers treat diphthongs. In Kerkenna Arabic, diphthongs are reduced to /ē/ and /ō/ (Herin and Zammit 2017, p. 140). 40 As for Sahel, Sfaxi Arabic is an exception, especially for medial imāla. See (Sellami 2019). The first variety of Arabic of Kerkenna, described by Herin and Zammit, shows some exceptions since medial imāla of /ā/ is not raised, but final imāla is raised only in monosyllabic words. A second variety shows the raising of final /a/ triggered after non-emphatic front consonants and front vowels. The variety of Mellita raises final /a/. See (Herin and Zammit 2017, pp. 140–41). 41 Sousse Arabic has inti (Talmoudi 1980, p. 143). 42 See also (Yoda 2019): passim, in which we find āni “I”, ah.na “we” and inti “you”. For Sousse Arabic, see (Talmoudi 1980, p. 143) and for Tunis Judeo-Arabic, which offers a unique form @nti for the second person singular “you”, (Cohen 1975, pp. 210–11). See in particular p. XXII, n. 3 on the origins of nä¯ ya/nä¯ y. 43 ī 44 Also the Judeo-Arabic of Tunis shares the use of ellı̄ and variants: see (Cohen 1975, pp. 218–21). In Tozeur, ellı̄, ella and allomorphs alternate (Saada 1984, p. 79). 45 See also the comparative study of (Taine-Cheikh 1994). 46 Some other features indicated by Biţuna are present in the variety of Mahdia and Msaken, such as the use of zūz + plural of the noun, feature already used in Medieval Maghribi Arabic (see (La Rosa 2019, pp. 218–19; Corriente et al. 2015, pp. 110–11), for Msaken Arabic see (Bouhlel 2009, p. 128)), the feminine form of the numerals from 3 to 10 when the numeral in question has the function of an isolated substantive. The use of the indefinite numeral wāh.@d al- has not been attested. 47 īdī ʿAlī Ḫ ī The word askar, “soldier” or “army” as a collective, is considered by the speakers both as a singular and as a plural. As for the variety of Sousse, (Talmoudi 1980, p. 139) points out that it has a different vowel quantity. The –n form in numerals from 11 to 19 is also present (Talmoudi 1980, p. 140). 48 The same happens in many Tunisian coastal ā vernaculars, such as Sfaxi Arabic: see (Sellami 2019), and in Tunis Judeo-Arabic, see (Cohen 1975, p. 104). 49 In Kairouan, we find nistennu “we wait for”. Information taken from some videos of the page Radio Monastir. 50 In Bekalta, I found the example nistennēw w-mā nensūhum “we wait and we do not forget them”, so further research on the varieties spoken in the region will be necessary to sketch a more precise map of the distribution of this feature. 51 The feature, of course, is also shared by Tunis Judeo-Arabic (Cohen 1975, p. 104). 52 “Labelling a dialect as conservative [ . . . ] means that it exibits a certain degree of stability over time: certain features are less likely to evolve because there are fewer exogenous factors that could lead to change” (Herin 2019, pp. 94–95). 53 https://tunico.acdh.oeaw.ac.at/dictionary.html?query=%22to%20see%22 accessed on 13 August 2021. 54 “created, without any doubt, under the analogical influence of the passive-reflexives with initial t- of forms V and VI, which proceede respectively from forms II and V, this stem proceeds from verbs of the first form generally in use. It constitutes its passive-reflexive”. English translation is mine. 55 For Sousse, see (Talmoudi 1980, p. 101). See also (Saada 1984, pp. 57–58) who finds the phenomenon in Tozeur. 56 Ḫ ī If there are indeed “It seems that a question remains: the value of the distinction between Hilali vs Sulaymi vsīdī MaʿAlī qili dialects. groups of more or less differentiated varieties and if it is necessary to give them a name, I am not sure that these three designations of socio-historical origin are really precise and of real help”. English translation is mine. Languages 2021, 6, 145 ā 21 of 23 57 [“While -ı̄w from Morocco to Tunisia should be seen as sedentary and urban, a transversal system with a perfect tense in -/āw/ and an imperfect tense in -/ū/ is in fact much more frequent than the simple methodological opposition pre-Hilalian/Hilalian would suggest. If this system has to be conceived as transitional within a continuum whose two poles would be precisely the pre-Hilalian/hilalian typologies, then much of Tunisia (with the exception of its metropolises and Marāzı̄g varieties) should paradoxically be considered a transitional zone”. English translation is mine]. The verb nensū attested in Bekalta has to be verified and supported with other occurences to verify whether the varieties near Mahdia have any mixed features. 58 The critical issues of the application of this criterion of classification have already been underlined in the relative paragraph in the section devoted to phonology. 59 The already mentioned paper by Maura Tarquini seemed to confirm this trend. 60 The voiceless realization of /q/ was the norm in Medieval Arab cities and in the recitation of the Koran. For this reason, it must have always been considered a positive element by speakers. This encouraged the spread of the variant in the Arab world via the Maghrib. See (Vicente 2019, p. 109). 61 I wonder whether the preservation of the monophthongs /ı̄/ and /ū/ in the Arabic of Mahdia and the surrounding towns must be included in these elements. īdīfı̄ ʿAlī ī An example is Nizar Chaari’s novel Tūnis ı̄nayya, Ḫ in which the author inserts additional texts and materials downloadable on one’s own smartphone through a QR code. His aim was to involve young people in reading and making it attractive to them, by giving them the opportunity to do it wherever and whenever they want through their smartphone. See (La Rosa Forthcoming). 62 63 Such an analysis on the influence of the medium (radio and video) on the variety of Arabic used by the speakers involved in the videos selected will be the object of future studies. In fact, in the wider framework of the ongoing studies on the features of contemporary Media Arabic, observing how the varieties of Arabic are used in Tunisia could help describe more precisely the complex situation of linguistic variation in the country. On this subject, see for instance the PhD thesis “Arabe Mixte 2.0: la variation syntaxique et stylistique dans les journaux numériques marocains (janvier-décembre 2016)”, defended by Rosa Pennisi in December 2020. References Attia, Abdelmajid. 1969. Le parler de Mahdia. In Travaux de Phonologie. Parlers de: Djemmal, Gabes, Mahdia (Tunisie), Treviso (Italie). Edited by Taieb Baccouche, Hichem Skik, Abdelmajid Attia and Mohamed El Habib Ounali. Tunis: Centre d’etudes Économiques et Sociales, pp. 116–38. Avram, Andrei. 2012. Some phonological changes in Maltese reflected in onomastics. Bucharest Working Papers in Linguistics 14: 99–119. Bearman, Peri, Thierry Bianquis, Clifford Edmund Bosworth, Emery van Donzel, and Wolfhart P. Heinrichs, eds. 1986. Kul-Oghlu. In . Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed. Consulted online on June 9 2021. [CrossRef] Benkato, Adam. 2019. From Medieval Tribes to Modern Dialects: On the Afterlives of Colonial Knowledge in Arabic Dialectology. Philological Encounters 4: 2–25. [CrossRef] Bettini, Lidia, and Paolo La Spisa, eds. 2012. Au-delà de l’arabe Standard. Moyen arabe et Arabe mixte dans les Sources Médiévales, Modernes et Contemporaines. Quaderni di Semitistica. Firenze: Università di Firenze, vol. 28. Biţuna, Gabriel. 2011. The Morpho-Syntax of the Numeral in the Spoken Arabic of Tunis. Romano-Arabica 8–11: 25–42. Boubakri, Hassan, and Ridha Lamine. 1992. Migrations pendulaires autour de M’saken. Revue Tunisienne de Géographie 19–20: 11–29. Bresc, Henri, and Annliese Nef. 1999. La première géographie de l’Occident. Présentation, Notes, Index, Chronologie et Bibliographie. Traduction du Chevalier Jaubert, revue par Annliese Nef. Paris: Flammarion. Bouhlel, Ezzeddine. 2009. Le Parler m’sakenien. Synergies Tunisie 1: 125–34. Bournand, François. 1893. Tunisie et Tunisiens. Paris: Taffin-Lefort. Burgaretta, Dario. 2016. Un’elegia in giudeo-arabo di Sicilia per il massacro di Noto e Modica del 1474 (Ms. Parm. 1741 della Biblioteca Palatina di Parma). Sefer Yuh.asin 4: 7–194. Cantineau, Jean. 1960. Cours de Phonétique Arabe. Notions Générales de Phonétique et Phonologie. Paris: Librairie Kliencksieck. Carter, Michael G. 2007. Elision. In Encyclopedia of Arabic Languages and Linguistics. Edited by Kees Versteegh. Leiden and Boston: Brill, vol. 2, pp. 16–18. Cohen, David. 1969. Sur le statut phonologique de l’emphase en arabe. Word 25: 59–69. [CrossRef] Cohen, David. 1975. Le parler arabe des Juifs de Tunis. Tome II. Étude Linguistique. Paris: Mouton. Corriente, Federico, Christophe Pereira, and Ángeles Vicente. 2015. Aperçu Grammatical Du faisceau Dialectal arabe Andalou. Perspectives Synchroniques, Diachroniques et Panchroniques. Encyclopédie linguistique d’al-Andalus. Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter, vol. 1. Corriente, Federico, Christophe Pereira, and Ángeles Vicente. 2017. Dictionnaire du Faisceau Dialectal Arabe Andalou. Perspectives Phraséologiques et Étymologique. Encyclopédie Linguistique d’al-Andalus. Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter, vol. 2. Dallaji, Ines. 2017. Grammatical and Lexical Notes on the Arabic Dialect of Nabeul (Northern Tunisia). In Lisan Al-Arab. Studies in Arabic Dialects. Proceedings of the 10th International Conference of AIDA Qatar University 2013. Edited by Muntasir Fayez Faris Al-Hamad, Rizwan Ahmad and Hafid I. Alaoui. Lit: Zurich, pp. 151–62. D’Anna, Luca. 2017. Italiano, siciliano e arabo in contatto. Profilo sociolinguistico dela comunità tunisina di Mazara del Vallo. Palermo: Centro di Studi Filologici e Linguistici Siciliani. Languages 2021, 6, 145 22 of 23 D’Anna, Luca. 2020. The Arabic dialect of Chebba: Preliminary data and historical considerations. Zeitschrift für Arabische Linguistik 72: 80–100. [CrossRef] Decret, François. 2003. Les Invasions Hilaliennes en Ifrîqiya. Office National des Statistiques pour la Population et la Démographie. Available online: https://www.clio.fr/bibliotheque/les_invasions_hilaliennes_en_ifriqiya.asp (accessed on 11 August 2021). Den Heijer, Johannes. 2012. Introduction: Middle and Mixed Arabic, A New Trend in Arabic Studies. In Middle Arabic and Mixed Arabic. Diachrony and Synchrony. Edited by Liesbeth Zack and Arie Schippers. Leiden: Brill, pp. 1–25. [CrossRef] Ferrando, Ignacio. 1995. El dialecto andalusí de la Marca Media. Los Documentos Mozárabes Toledanos de los Siglos XII y XIII. Zaragoza: Universidad de Zaragoza (Area de estudios Arabes e Islámicos 4). Ghazeli, Salem. 1981. La Coarticulation de l’Emphase En Arabe. Arabica 28: 251–77. [CrossRef] Gibson, Maik. 2002. Dialect Levelling in Tunisian Arabic: Towards a New Spoken Standard. In Language Contact and Language Conflict in Arabic. Variations on a Sociolinguistic Theme. Edited by Rouchdy Aleya. Oxon and New York: Routledge, pp. 24–40. Gibson, Micheal Luke. 1998. Dialect Contact in Tunisian Arabic: Sociolinguistic and Structural Aspects. Ph.D. thesis, University of Reading, Reading, UK. Goitein, Shelomo Dov. 2010. Studies in Islamic History and Institutions. Brill Classics in Islam. With an Introduction by Norman A. Stillman. Leiden and Boston: Brill, vol. 5. Gouma, Taoufik. 2013. L’emphase en Arabe Marocain: Vers une Analyse Autosegmentale. Ph.D. thesis, Université de Paris 8, Paris, France. ā Guerrero, Jairo. 2018. Les parlers Jbala-villageois. Étude grammAticale d’une Typologie rurale de l’arabe Dialectal Maghrébin. Dialectologia 20: 85–105. Available online: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02095906 (accessed on 1 August 2021). Herin, Bruno. 2019. Traditional Dialects. In The Routledge Handbook of Arabic Sociolinguistics. Edited by Enam Al-Wer and Uri Horesh. London and New York: Routledge, pp. 93–105. Herin, Bruno, and Martin Zammit. 2017. Three for the Price of One: The Dialects of Kerkennah (Tunisia). In Tunisian and Libyan Arabic Dialects. Common Trends—Recent Developments –Diachronic Aspects. Edited by Veronika Ritt-Benmimoun. Zaragoza: Prensas de la Universidad de Zaragoza, pp. 135–46. Ladefoged, Peter, and Ian Maddieson. 1996. The Sounds of the World’s Languages. Oxford: Blackpowell. Lajmi, Dhouha. 2009. Spécificités du dialecte Sfaxien. Synergies Tunisie 1: 135–42. Larcher, Pierre. 2001. Moyen Arabe et Arabe Moyen. Arabica 48: 578–609. [CrossRef] La Rosa, Cristina. 2018. Alcune strategie retoriche nel discorso politico tunisino: Uso dei deittici e ripetizione lessicale. La rivista di Arablit 15: 67–92. La Rosa, Cristina. 2019. L’arabo di Sicilia nel Contesto Maghrebino: Nuove Prospettive di Ricerca. La Sicilia Islamica: Testi, Ricerche Letterarie e Linguistiche. Roma: Istituto Per l’Oriente Carlo Alfonso Nallino, vol. 1. īdīfı̄ ʿAlī ī īdī ʿAlī Ḫ īǧa al-Tūnisiyya between Resistance and Hypertextuality. In La Rosa, Cristina. Forthcoming. Tūnis ı̄nayya Ḫ by Nizār al-Ša arı̄: Al-Dāri Studies on Arabic Dialectology and Sociolinguistics. Proceedings of the 13th International Conference of AIDA held in Kutaisi in June 10–13. Edited by GuramGuram Chikovani and Zviad Tskhvediani. Kutaisi: Akaki Tsereteli State University Press, pp. 410–21. Lentin, Jérôme. 2006/2007. L’arabe parlé en Sicile était-il un arabe périphérique? Romano-Arabica 6–7: 71–84. Lentin, Jérôme, and Jacques GrandHenry ’, eds. 2008. Moyen Arabe et Variétés Mixtes de l’arabe À travers l’histoire. Actes du Premier colloque International (Louvain-la-Neuve, 10–14 mai 2004). Publications de l’Institut Orientaliste de Louvain. Louvain-la-Neuve: Institut Orientaliste de Louvain, vol. 58. Maamouri, Mohamed. 1967. The Phonology of Tunisian Arabic. Ph.D. dissertation, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA. Ma Mung, Emmanuel. 1984. L’impact des transferts migratoires dans la ville de M’saken (Tunisie). Revue Européenne des Migrations Internationals 2: 163–78. Available online: https://www.persee.fr/doc/remi_0765-0752_1986_num_2_1_1001 (accessed on 28 May 2021). [CrossRef] Marçais, Philippe. 1977. Esquisse grammaticale de l’arabe maghrébin. Paris: Maisonneuve. Marçais, William. 1950. Les parlers arabes. In Initiation à la Tunisie. Edited by André Basset. Paris: Maisonneuve, pp. 195–219. Marçais, William, and Abderrahmâne Guiga. 1925. Textes arabes de Takroûna. Textes, Transcription et Traduction annotée. Paris: Imprimerie Nationale, Leroux. Marçais, William, and Abderrahmâne Guiga. 1958. Textes Arabes de Takroûna. Contribution à L’étude du Vocabulaire arabe. Glossaire. Paris: Imprimerie Nationale, Librairie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner. Mion, Giuliano. 2015. Réflexions sur la catégorie des ‘parlers villageois’ en arabe tunisien. Romano-Arabica 15: 269–77. Mion, Giuliano. 2017. Un arabo cipriota romanizzato? Distacchi e identità fra variazione scrittoria e confessione religiosa. In Aspetti della Variazione Linguistica. Discorso, Sistema, Repertori. Edited by Carlo Consani. Milan: LED, pp. 83–95. [CrossRef] Mion, Giuliano. 2018. Pré-hilalien, hilalien, zones de transition. Relire quelques classiques aujourd’hui. In Mediterranean Contaminations. Middle East, North Africa, and Europe in Contact. Edited by Giuliano Mion. Berlin: Klaus Schwarz Verlag, pp. 102–25. Nguyen, Dong. 2021. Dialect Variation on Social Media. Pre-print. Forthcoming in Similar Languages, Varieties, and Dialects. (Studies in Natural Language Processing Series); Edited by Marcos Zampieri and Preslav Nakov. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ritt-Benmimoun, Veronika. 2014. The Tunisian Hilāl and Sulaym Dialects. A Preliminary Comparative Study. In Alf lahǧa wa lahǧa Lit-Verlag Proceedings of the 9th AIDA Conference. Edited by Olivier Durand, Angela Daiana Langone, and Giuliano Mion. Münster and Wien: Lit-Verlag, pp. 351–60. Saada, Lucienne. 1984. Eléments de Description du Parler arabe de Tozeur (Tunisie). Paris: Geuthner. Languages 2021, 6, 145 23 of 23 Sayahi, Lotfi. 2019. Diglossia and the normalization of the vernacular. Focus on Tunisia. In The Routledge Handbook of Arabic Sociolinguistics. Edited by Enam Al-Wer and Uri Horesh. London and New York: Routledge, pp. 227–39. Sellami, Zeineb. 2019. The Dialect of Sfax (Tunisia). In Studies on Arabic Dialectology and Sociolinguistics: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference of AIDA held in Marseille from May 30th to June 2nd 2017 [online]. Aix-en-Provence: Institut de Recherches et D’études sur les Mondes Arabes et Musulmans. [CrossRef] Skik, Hichem. 2000. La prononciation de qâf arabe en Tunisie. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference of Aïda. Edited by Manwel Mifsud. Malta: pp. 131–36. Soucek, Svat. 1993. Monastir. In Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed. Edited by Clifford Edmund Bosworth, Emery van Donzel, Wolfhart P. Heinrichs and Charles Pellat. Leiden: Brill, vol. 7, pp. 227–29. Taïeb, Jacques, and Mansour Sayah. 2003. Remarques sur le parler judéo-arabe de Tunisie. Diasporas. Histoire Et Sociétés 2: 5–64. Available online: https://www.persee.fr/doc/diasp_1637-5823_2003_num_2_1_878 (accessed on 5 May 2021). Taine-Cheikh, Catherine. 1994. Les numéraux cardinaux de 3 à 10 dans les dialectes arabes. In Actes des Premières Journées Internationales de Dialectologie Arabe de Paris. Edited by Dominique Caubet and Martine Vanhove. Paris: INALCO, pp. 251–66. Taine-Cheikh, Catherine. 2017. La classification des parlers bédouins du Maghreb: Revisiter le classement traditionnel. In Tunisian and Libyan Arabic Dialects: Common Trends, Recent Developments, Diachronic Aspects. Edited by Prensas Universitarias de Zaragoza. Zaragoza: Prensas de la Universidad de Zaragoza, pp. 15–42. Talbi, Mohamed. 1986. "al-Mahdiyya". In Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed. Edited by Clifford Edmund Bosworth, Emery van Donzel, Wolfhart P. Heinrichs and Charles Pellat. Leiden: Brill, vol. 5, pp. 1245–47. Talmoudi, Fathi. 1980. The Arabic Dialect of Sūsa (Tunisia). Göteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis. Van-Mol, Marc. 2010. Oral Media and Corpus Linguistics: A First Methodological Outline. In Arabic and the Media: Linguistic Analyses and Application. Edited by Reem Bassiouney. Leiden and Boston: Brill, pp. 63–80. Vicente, Ángeles. 2019. Dialect contact and urban dialects. In The Routledge Handbook of Arabic Sociolinguistics. Edited by Enam Al-Wer and Uri Horesh. London and New York: Routledge, pp. 106–16. Voisins d’Ambre, Anne Caroline. 1884. Excursions d’une Française dans la Régence de Tunis par Mme de Voisins (Pierre-Coeur). Paris: Dreyfous. Yoda, Sumikazu. 2008. On the Vowel System of the al-Mahdı̄yya Dialect of Central Tunisia. In Between the Atlantic and Indian Oceans. Studies on Contemporary Arabic Dialects. Proceedings of the 7th Aida Confer-ence, Held in Vienna from 5–9 September 2006. Edited by Stephan Procházka and Veronika Ritt-Benmimoun. Münster and Wien: Lit-Verlag, pp. 483–90. Yoda, Sumikazu. 2019. Texts from Mahdı̄yya. Journal of Arabic and Islamic Studies 17: 55–70. Zack, Liesbeth, and Arie Schippers. 2012. Middle Arabic and Mixed Arabic. Diachrony and Synchrony. Leiden and Boston: Brill. Zammit, Martin. 2014. The Sfaxi Tunisian Element in Maltese. In Perspectives on Maltese Lingusitics. Edited by Albert Borg, Sandro Caruana and Alexandra Vella. Berlin: De Gruyter, pp. 23–44.