The Urgent Necessity for Learning and Using English as an International Dialect of Communication in the Arab School System and Universities: A Sociolinguistic Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Today, English has been carried around the world and has grown in use until it has become the second most widely spoken language of the world after Chinese and the first language in international use. Interestingly, while English is predominantly used by more people than any other language, its mother tongue speakers make up only “quarter” or a fifth of the total. This paper argues the need for an international variety of English to be taught in schools and universities in the Arab world. The international variety is defined as English that is understood by multilingual audience. It is a kind of English that is comprehensible outside the Arab world. The writer discusses the problem posed in adopting such a variety. The writer argues that what determines the use of English in Arab schools and universities should be the job, the hobby, or the field of study of students. English should be looked upon as a means of communicating and understanding each other in fields that require the uses of a language other than Arabic. The writer argues that the goal of teaching an international variety should not be acculturation so as to preserve the cultural identity of Arab speakers of English.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".