Essay: Arabicized business terms

Essay details:

  • Subject area(s): Business essays
  • Reading time: 49 minutes
  • Price: Free download
  • Published on: December 2, 2015
  • File format: Text
  • Number of pages: 2
  • Arabicized business terms
    0.0 rating based on 12,345 ratings
    Overall rating: 0 out of 5 based on 0 reviews.

Text preview of this essay:

This page of the essay has 12413 words. Download the full version above.

Chapter one: Introduction
1.1 Preface
Arabicization and terminology planning in translation have received much attention over the last two decades. Terminology planning will inevitably be one of the critical issues in translation due to the ongoing developments in all fields of science and the continuing need for coining new terms.
This study measures the degree of acceptability of Arabicized business terms taken from different Arabic and Arabicized sources. Moreover, it examines the attitudes of business students toward the Arabicization of business terms and the work of the Jordan Academy of Arabic.
Globalization is the motive behind the increasing demand to improve business language, using unified jargon. There is an urgent need to improve Arabic language and to support it with unified, acceptable and accurate business terms through Arabicization. This helps Arabic language in coping up with the continuous developments in business field.
Previous studies have not addressed the issue of Arabicization of business terms from terminology planning perspective. They ignored the issue of Arabicization in business field. The Jordan Academy of Arabic has not published a separate pamphlet for Arabicized business terms like other terms in other fields. This study is the first step toward providing Arabic literature with acceptable and unified business terms, helping the translators to render acceptable texts in business field. The present study also brings into focus the roles of gender, university and major they play in Arabicization process. This facilitates the task of the decision makers in Arabicization process in producing acceptable terms, taking into consideration these roles.
El-Khafaifi (1985) distinguishes two different meanings for Arabicization. He (1985: 151-152) states that:
Grammarians used this term to designate borrowing whereby foreign words are reincorporated into the language’. The second meaning of the term’. refers to the utilization of all word-formational procedures to modernize and enrich the Arabic language and make it capable of communication, instruction and all forms of intellectual exchange in all fields, and on all levels.
Regarding the word “term”, Al-Khuri (2001) argues that the term is a word which has a new meaning different from its original denotative meaning and it is utilized in scientific contexts in specific field of study.
Sager (1990: 2) defines terminology as “the study of and the field of activity concerned with the collection, description, processing and presentation of terms, i.e. lexical items belonging to specialised area of usage of one or more languages.”
Terminology planning is defined by AL-Abed AL-Haq (1998a: 8) as ” a process which refers to activities and deliberate efforts to plan for: corpus, status, and acquisition of terms”.
This study is divided into five main chapters. In the first chapter, the problem of the study is stated and the significance of it is clarified. In the second chapter, the review of related literature and the definitions of key terms are presented. The methodology is outlined in the third chapter. The fourth chapter shows the results of the study. Also, the results are discussed in the same chapter. Finally, conclusions and recommendations are drawn in the fifth chapter.
1.2 Statement of the Problem
The major issue in this study is measuring the degree of acceptability of some problematic Arabicized business terms found in different Arabic and Arabicized sources. The basis of measuring the degree of acceptability is the criteria of acceptability: Knowledge, evaluation, usage, adoption and proficiency (Cooper, 1989).
The researcher investigates the attitudes of business students toward the Arabicization of business terms. The present study also sheds light on the criteria to be taken into consideration in the process of Arabicization of business terms to get acceptable terms by the users.
The central questions to be dealt with in this study are as follows:
1. To what extent are the Arabicized business terms accepted by the users from terminology planning perspective?
2. To what extent are the five criteria of acceptability (knowledge, usage, evaluation, adoption and proficiency) influenced by gender, university, and major?
3. To what extent are the five criteria of acceptability correlated with each other?
4. What are the attitudes of business students toward the idea of Arabicization and the work of the Jordan Academy of Arabic?
1.3 Significance of the Study
The present study brings into focus the issue of adopting approved criteria for measuring the acceptability of Arabicized business terms, hence, paving the way for Arabic language academies in Jordan and the Arab world to get acceptable terminology by adopting these criteria in the process of Arabicization. As a result of this, the significance of this study lies in calling for refreshing and revitalizing the literature of term planning in the process of Arabicization not only in Jordan but also in the Arab world as a whole.
Chapter two: Definitions of Key Terms and Review of Related Literature
2.1 Definitions of the Key Terms
2.1.1 Introduction
“Terminology is fundamentally concerned with names and the process of naming.” (Rey, 1995: 11).Originally, the word “nomenclature” which appeared in French and English at the beginning of sixteenth century was used before the usage of the word terminology (Rey, 1995).
In the twentieth century, English dictionaries included the meaning of the word terminology in the sense we utilize these days (Rey, 1995). According to The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Current English (1919: 911), Terminology is a “science of proper use of terms”. Regarding the word “term”, Al-Khuri (2001) argues that the term is a word which has a new meaning different from its original denotative meaning and it is utilized in scientific contexts in specific field of study.
In the literature, other definitions of the words terminology and terminology planning can be found. Sager (1990: 3) distinguishes three meanings for the word terminology as the following:
1. the set of practices and methods used for the collection, description, and presentation of terms;
2. the set of premises, arguments, and conclusions required for explaining the relationships between concepts and terms which are fundamental coherent activity under 1; and
3. a vocabulary of a special subject field.
Emran (1993: 170) defines terminology as “a scientific and technical discipline which is concerned with the profound study of scientific terms in specific scientific and technical field regarding the concepts, naming these concepts, standardizing and unifying them.” (The translation is mine.)
The International Information Centre for Terminology (Infoterm) (2005: 8) defines terminology as “‘.sets of terms with their specialized meanings (concepts) used in particular SPLs [special purpose language or specialized language] of specific domains.”
Could these groups of terms be set arbitrarily? Are there any steps need to be taken in order to put them? Who are the persons or the parts responsible for PLANNING terminology?
2.1.2 What is Terminology Planning?
Terms cannot be set arbitrarily. There has to be coordination between language academies, translators, planners, linguists and scientists to coin new terms in different fields, depending on linguistic and scientific bases. Every language has its own nature which is different from other languages. Thus, what is acceptable in one language could not be adequate for another one. Accordingly, terminology planning is an organized and inevitable activity which revives the literature of languages and provides them with new scientific terms, aiming at protecting languages from death.
Terminology planning is defined by AL-Abed AL-Haq (1998a: 8) as:
A process which refers to activities and deliberate efforts to plan for: corpus, status, and acquisition of terms. Thus, corpus term planning refers to purely linguistic issues such as coining new terms, reforming their spellings, and adopting them. It refers, in short, to the creation of new forms by word coinage processes, the modification of old ones, or the selection from alternative form in a spoken or written code. Term cultivation, reform, standardization, selection, codification, elaboration and modernization represent instances of corpus term planning. Status term planning is mainly concerned with the recognition by government, government-authorized agencies, authoritative bodies, and individuals of the significance or position of terms in all aspects of life. Therefore, it refers to the allocation of terms to given functions. Term allocation is defined as authoritative decisions to maintain, extend, or restrict the range of uses (functional range) of a term in particular setting’.Acquisition term planning is mainly concerned with teaching-learning of the newly coined terms.
Al-Abed AL-Haq (1998a) suggests that language planning and terminology planning are very related to each other. He (1998a: 9) argues that “Terms are components of language, and what is characteristic of language is characteristic of terms. Moreover, what is applicable to language from planning perspective is applicable to term planning.”
Infoterm (2005) distinguishes between language planning and terminology planning. Terminology planning cannot be implemented without the presence of previous linguistic base while language planning can create a language without the existence of it (Infoterm: 2005). Infoterm (2005: 8) states:
Terminology planning relies on the existence of linguistic norms and a certain grammatical and orthographical stability in the written language. On this basis, terminology planning consciously and systematically develops special language according to the needs and requirements of domain communication, where a vast number of new technical terms are created every day in hundreds of languages all over the world.
2.2 Guidelines for Term Planning
2.2.1 Technology and Term Planning
Since technology takes place in all aspects of life these days, planners should take advantage of technology for reviving language and providing it with new terms by taking advantage of available technological tools and software.
Technology plays a vital role in facilitating and organizing the work of language and term planners and translators. Sager (1990: 88) suggests that technology contributes in paving the way to:
1. collect and disseminate new scientific terminology as it evolves, thus avoiding duplication, distortion, and misunderstanding;
2. plan the systematic collection and dissemination of terminology of industrial development;
3. design the terminology required for writing product or service documentation in one or several parallel language versions, and
4. guarantee terminological consistency in documents and their translations.
Terminology management systems are “tools to record, store, process and output terminological data according to recognized professional principles.” (Infoterm 2005: 3)
2.2.2 Criteria for Acceptability of a Translated Technical Term
International Organization for Standardisation (ISO) has provided worldwide guidelines for word formation suitable for all languages. They are listed in ISO document R 704 (Naming Principle) as follows (as cited in Sager, 1990: 89):
1. Terms should be created systematically with respect to their morphological, syntactic, semantic and pragmatic characteristics.
2. A term should conform to the morphology, spelling and pronunciation conventions of the language for which it is intended.
3. Once a term has gained wide acceptance it should not be changed without compelling reasons and strong certainty that the new term will become accepted as a full substitute.
4. If a new term succeeds only partially in replacing an existing term, the confusion may become worse as this would amount to deliberate synonym creation. In this case it is preferable to introduce a new term.
Al-Sayadi (1980) focuses on brevity and accuracy of the term to be accepted by the users. AL-Abed AL-Haq (1998a) also focuses on the conciseness of the term to be ideal. Khalifah (1987) believes that the desire to utilize the term, calling for using it, and time are the things which control the spread or the death of a term.
According to Sager (1990:89), the conditions needed for the terms to be accepted by the users are:
1. The term must relate directly to the concept. It must express the concept clearly. A logical construction is advisable. 2. The term must be lexically systematic. It must follow an existing lexical pattern and if the words are of foreign origin, a uniform transcription must be preserved. 3. The term must conform to the general rules of word-formation of the language which will also dictate the word order in compounds and phrases. 4. Term should be capable of providing derivatives. 5. Terms should not be pleonastic (i.e. no redundant repetition, e.g. combining a foreign word with a native word having the same meaning). 6. Without sacrificing precision, terms should be concise and not contain unnecessary information. 7. There should be no synonyms whether absolute, relative or apparent. 8. Terms should not have morphological variants. 9. Terms should not have homonyms.
Sager (1990: 13) argues that the theory of terminology can be examined from three dimensions: cognitive, linguistic and communicative dimensions. Cognitive dimension examines the relationship between the linguistic structure of the terminologies and their intangible contents. However, Linguistic dimension investigates the representation of these abstract contents in language. Finally, Communicative dimension studies the usage of these terminologies and the way of organizing them.
3.3 Arabicization
3.3.1 Introduction
Arabicization is an inevitable need for Arabic language to protect it from death and to enrich its literature with new words. Accordingly, calling for organizing Arabicization process is now a necessity to maintain the purity of the Arabic language.
AL-Abed AL-Haq (1998b) differentiates between Arabicization and Arabization. Arabization is derived from the word Arab. Thus, it refers to Arab culture and people and it has nothing to do with language. On the contrary, Arabicization which is the word he opts for in his studies of terminology and language planning is derived from the word Arabic. Thus, it is something has to do with lexis and lexical items in a given language. Accordingly, he uses it when referring to Arabic language planning. In the present study, the researcher opts for the word Arabicization for the same reason.
According to Balasi (1988: 137), Arabicization is the “uttering of foreign words by Arabs according to their methods and ways.” (The translation is mine)
Al-Alami (1990: 160) concludes that Arabicization as agreed by the researchers in this field is “to find an Arabic equivalent for a foreign word which does not have an Arabic equivalent and it has not been known one for it before.” (The translation is mine.)
Al-Baba (1995: 30) distinguishes two definitions for Arabicization:
The first one is to borrow a foreign term and make it suitable for Arabic letters and morphology. The second one is to create Arabic terms by translation, derivation, or compounding in order to find Arabic equivalents for foreign terms. (The translation is mine.)
According to al-Qurashi (1982: 32), “Arabization” includes two steps: “(1) morphological structure and (2) sound structure”. Foreign terms have to cope up with Arabic language phonologically and morphologically to become Arabicized by following the aforementioned steps.
For Abed Al-Aziz (1990), Arabicization has two facets. The first one is the phonological transferring of the words into Arabic. The second one is the translation of the words in which the foreign words are semantically transferred into Arabic. He also believes that these facets are interdependent.
Since Al-Didawi (2007: 78) considers that translating into Arabic is the same as Arabicization, he combines Arabicization and translation in one term, namely “Arabicized translation”. He defines Arabicized translation as rendering ideas into Arabic by summarizing the original text in the target language, and simplifying it to the readers, having the right to change it without affecting its meaning. Summarizing foreign scientific research in Arabic is an example (Al-Didawi, 2007: 78).
Like Jaied (2010), Farghal (2012) regards Arabicization as a strategy of translation. He argues that whenever the translator comes across new terms, he may borrow terms from other languages, making them suitable morphologically and phonologically to Arabic language.
3.3.2 Arabicization Planning
A non-organized Arabicization activity may cause ambiguity to Arabicized terms. This may confuse the users of the terms when coming across the floods of terms produced for the same foreign term. Therefore, standardizing the Arabicized terms is a basic need for the success of Arabicization planning activities. This may also facilitate going over the problem of synonomy in Arabic language which emerges from inaccurate choosing of non-organized Arabicized terms.
Arabicization planning is defined by AL-Abed AL-Haq (1998b: 59-60) as:
A process’.which refers to activities and deliberate efforts to plan for: corpus, status, and acquisition of Arabicization. Thus, corpus Arabicization refers to the purely linguistic issues of Arabicization. It includes activities such as coining new terms, reforming spelling, and adopting new scientific symbols’.Status Arabicization is mainly concerned with the recognition by government, government-authorized agencies, authoritative bodies and individuals of the significance or position of Arabic or Arabicization in relation to others’.Acquisition planning of Arabicization refers to the teaching-learning process, Arabic language spread, and adopting of Arabicization.
Abu- Abdo (1984) suggests many recommendations for Arabicization to be in its right way. He proposes fighting illiteracy and teaching Arabs the standard Arabic language, standardizing Arabicized terms in all fields, making a law for Arabicization, and raising public awareness regarding the importance of Arabicization. The previous points embody the last two processes of Arabicization suggested by AL- Abed AL-Haq (1998b). On the other hand, Abu- Abdo (1984) recommends not translating foreign phrases literally, avoiding colloquial words, trying not to use archaic words which aim at showing off, but trying to utilize common ones. These points exemplify corpus Arabicization suggested by AL-Abed AL-Haq (1998b).
3.4 Review of Related Literature
Arabicization and terminology planning have been the topics of focus by many researchers in the Arab world and in Jordan. These studies play a vital role in making Arabic language able to deal with the flood of new terminologies in different subject areas.
El-Khafaifi (1985) discussed the methods (Analogical derivation, Compounding, and Arabicization) adopted by language academies in enriching Arabic language and providing it with new terminologies in various scientific and technical subject areas. He also discussed the factors which caused problems in coining new technical and scientific terms. He ended by assessing the effectiveness of language academies in making Arabic language able to cope up with the influx of new scientific and technical terminologies.
Saad (1992) investigated Arabicization from language planning perspective. He shed light on Arabicization as an ideological process. In the context of the study, ideology had to do with nationalism and pan Arabism. He concluded that ethnicity played a vital role in forming the attitudes of Algerian students toward Arabicization. Berbers had negative attitudes toward Arabicization, unlike Arabs who called for Arabicization. Political orientations also had impact on Arabicization. If Muslim fundamentalists come to power in the future, they would promote Arabicization in education. On the contrary, if democratization becomes the political future of Algeria, bilingualism would come back to education.
Rabab””’ah (1995) discussed the problem of synonomy in translating medical terms into Arabic and the factors which caused it. He concluded that Arabicization was a good solution to standardize and unify medical terms in Arab countries.
Al-Smadi (1997) studied the problem of Arabicization of military terms from language planning perspective. He found that there was no meeting between Arabicized military terms produced by the Jordan Academy of Arabic and what was used by soldiers. He also concluded that soldiers were motivated to learn English more than Arabic. Besides, the suggested terms by soldiers were more acceptable than those proposed by the academy. Moreover, the soldiers were very interested toward the process of Arabicization of military terms.
Diknash (1998) highlighted the problem of Arabicization of nursing from language planning perspective. She came to the conclusion that there was a difference between what was produced by the Jordan Academy of Arabic and what was frequently used by specialists and students. In addition, the majority of students had positive attitudes toward the Arabicization of nursing terms. However, most of the sample subjects preferred learning in English rather than in Arabic.
Al-Assal (1998) shed light on the issue of acceptability and the diffusion of borrowed and native medical and engineering terms. He reached to the conclusion that the low percentage of using Arabic equivalents of scientific terms between the students of Jordanian universities comparing with Syrian ones was not because the lack of Arabic equivalents, rather, for other factors such as the lack of coordination between scientific translation agencies in Arab countries, the absence of consistent terminologies agreed on by all scientific translation agencies in the Arab world, the language of education was English not Arabic in scientific fields, and the problem of synonomy in Arabic.
Al-Oliemat (1998) investigated the attitudes of Jordanian Parliament members towards Arabicization from language planning perspective. The results of his study revealed the supportive attitude of PMs towards Arabicization as a way of reviving Pan-Arab identity. Their supportive attitude as law makers was translated by calling for a law that supports Arabicization process and organizes it.
O ‘ Kour (1999) conducted a study which investigated the Arabicization of carpentry terms from language planning perspective. The results of her study showed the huge gap between the terms which were produced by the Jordan Academy of Arabic and the frequent terms used by the users. Moreover, the carpenters’ proposed terms were more frequent and acceptable. The results also revealed the supportive attitude toward the Arabicization of carpentry terms. Finally, Carpenters preferred learning Arabic more than English.
Al-Kharabsheh (1999) conducted a study to investigate the marketability of Arabicized technical terms published by the Jordan Academy of Arabic. The study showed that the Arabicized technical terms were not highly accepted by the users because of the poor role the academy played in promoting the Arabicized terms, the lack for consistent Arabicized terms and the usage of English as a medium of instruction instead of Arabic. The study revealed that the users did not have a high positive attitude toward Arabicization. Also, the results of the study led to the conclusion that knowledge and awareness of Arabicized terms were the key elements for the marketability of Arabicized technical terms. Furthermore, accuracy, simplicity, communicability, understandability, adaptability, clarity, aestheticity, and ease of pronunciation were the main factors which would make the Arabicized terms well-known, accepted and then used.
Bentaouet-Kattan (1999) carried out a study which investigated the attitudes of students, teachers, and civil servants towards Arabicization and bilingualism in education in Morocco. Generally, they held positive attitude toward Arabic as a part of their culture and heritage. However, Bilingualism in education received the most positive attitude. In general, the study indicated that Moroccans preferred bilingualism in education rather than Arabicization.
Halloush (2000) investigated Arabicization of medical terms from language and term planning perspectives. The results of her study showed that the majority of physicians did not accept the Arabicized medical terms. Furthermore, they thought that there was no need to the Arabicization of medical terms. Besides, they thought that the work of the Jordan Academy of Arabic was poor and not organized.
AL-Qahtani (2000) discussed Arabicization as a quasi ideological-linguistic phenomenon. He concluded that Arabicization in Saudi Arabia suffered from the nonexistence of cooperation between language academies in the Arab world, the absence of a defined means for implementing Arabicization, and the lack of evaluation of the real usage of suggested Arabicized words. He pointed out to the frequency of using Arabicized words in written discourse in Saudi Arabia. He reached to the conclusion that there was a relationship between the context and the frequency of using Arabicized terms. Arabicized terms were used more frequently in scientific texts than in religious and literary ones. He also argued that translating scientific terms literally without checking the Arabicized equivalent of the source foreign term was a problem from which Arabicization suffered.
Mahasneh (2002) evaluated the translations of internet terms from language and term planning perspectives. She ended by the conclusion that computer students did not accept the Arabicized equivalents of foreign internet terms. Moreover, their attitude toward Arabicization was negative. In other words, they were not willing to accept Arabicization processes. Furthermore, they thought that the work of the Jordan Academy of Arabic needed to be reformed and promoted since the academy has not listed Arabicized equivalents for internet terms at that time.
AL-Sakran (2004) tackled the issue of Arabicization of agricultural terms from a terminology planning perspective. She concluded that most of agricultural students had positive attitudes toward Arabicization. The Arabicized agricultural terms by the Jordan Academy of Arabic were moderately accepted by the users. However, they called for the Arabicization of some agricultural terms again to be accepted by their users. They also called for reformation in the Arabicization mechanisms followed by the Jordan Academy of Arabic.
El-Fadni (2004) examined the attitudes of language users, policies and conflict toward the Arabicization of the curricula of medicine at the universities in Sudan. He concluded that most of students had positive attitudes toward learning medicine in Arabic. However, they did not accept marginalizing English language from using it as a medium of instruction in teaching medicine because they thought that they needed to know English as an important requirement for practicing medicine in the future. In other words, they preferred to use a mixture of Arabic and English in their studying.
Hawamdeh (2004) conducted a study which investigated the acceptability of using different word formation methods in translating weather terms. One of these methods was Arabicization. The results of the study revealed that the methods of coining new words in Arabic were familiar to the most of the specialists. The study also indicated that the pamphlet of weather terms published by the Jordan Academy of Arabic was not commonly used in translation because the translators while rendering weather terms depended on different specialized dictionaries and their general knowledge. In this study, the specialists, the students, and the translators used different synonyms for the same concept. Thus, the researcher called for unified and consistent terms by producing a unified dictionary for weather terms. Depending on the results of the study, knowledge, competence, and practice were the requirements to produce a precise translation.
AL-Abed AL-Haq and Al-Masaeid (2009) investigated language planning in Jordan in light of the attitudinal trends of university students toward language planning. They concluded that language planning was ideologized. In other words, it was affected by religion and cultural orientations. According to them, the reason behind defending Arabic was that Arabic is the language of Islam and Quran. They concluded that learning English did not mean adopting western culture and did not mean marginalizing the culture of Islamic civilization. However, learning English opened the doors for a future full of opportunities of education and business.
Al-Asal and Smadi (2012) measured the frequency of using Arabicization and Arabic expanding techniques by faculty members in their scientific lectures in Jordan University of Science and Technology (JUST) and in the University of Damascus (UD). The results of the study showed that Arabicization was utilized in JUST more than in UD. Nevertheless, Arabic expanding techniques, i.e., derivation, compounding, loan translation, semantic extension etc. were used more frequently in UD than in JUST. In their study, the researchers drew attention to the necessity for a solid basis of coordination between Arabic language academies to overcome the problem of synonomy and to standardize scientific terms.
Qoqazeh (2013) measured the acceptability of the Arabicization of ophthalmology terms done by Al-Lisan Al-Arabi Journal. She also investigated the attitudes of the specialists and students toward Arabicization and the feasibility of the efforts done by the journal. She concluded that the majority of specialists and students did not accept the Arabicized terms done by the journal and they had negative attitudes toward the Arabicization of ophthalmology terms and the work of the journal.
Chapter three: Methods and Procedures
This chapter presents the reader with the population of the study, its sample, and the instruments of collecting the data and analyzing them.
3.1 Population
The population of the present study consisted of one hundred students from Faculty of Business at the University of Jordan. The population also involved one hundred students from Faculty of Economic and Administrative Sciences at Yarmouk University.
3.2 The Sample
A total of two hundred business students were selected for the present study. The researcher opted for this sample size because it was believed to be convenient statistically and enough to get reliable results.
The sample subjects were divided on the basis of a number of sociolinguistic variables since investigating the influence of these variables on the criteria of acceptability was one of the aims of the present study. Thus, the questionnaire of the present study included these variables as shown in Table 1. These variables were: gender, university, and major. Gender may play a vital role in the process of Arabicization. This may be a pointer for sociolinguists to pay more attention to the role of gender in Arabicization.
Table 1. The Distribution of Sample Subject on the Basis of Sociolinguistic Variables
Variable Frequency Percentage (%)
1. Gender
Male
Female
Total
90
110
200
45.0
55.0
100.0
2. University
University of Jordan (UJ)
Yarmouk University (YU)
Total
100
100
200
50.0
50.0
100.0
3. Major
Accounting
Business Administration
Marketing
Finance and Banking Sciences
Economics
Public Administration
Islamic Banking
Finance
Management Information Systems (MIS)
Total
46
14
8
18
37
12
12
48
5
200
23.0
7.0
4.0
9.0
18.5
6.0
6.0
24.0
2.5
100
3.3 Instrument of Data Collection
3.3.1 The Questionnaire
The instrument that was employed in the present study was a questionnaire. This instrument was chosen because it is one of the most feasible ways to get valid and reliable results.
Cronbach’s Alpha was used to test the reliability of the scale in the questionnaire. It was found that Alpha (??) was 0.959 which was a sign of a very high level of internal consistency. This value was very high; it was greater than the usual percentage which is 0.60. This proved the reliability of the questionnaire. It showed that the questions in the questionnaire reliably measured the extent of the acceptability of the Arabicized business terms and the attitudes of business students toward the idea of Arabicization and Arabicized business terms, leading to reliable results.
The design of the questionnaire was based on AL-Abed AL-Haq (1998a). The questionnaire also was developed in many previous studies such as (Al-Smadi, 1997), (Diknash, 1998), (O’kour, 1999), (Halloush, 2000), (Mahasneh, 2002) and many others. It consisted of four sections.
The first section aimed at collecting the personal information of the samples. This information represented the sociolinguistic background of the questionnairee. They were: gender, university, and major. The second section consisted of fifty English business terms accompanied with their Arabicized equivalents i.e., forty one terms were taken from different Arabic and Arabicized sources and nine terms were taken from the official website of the Jordan Academy of Arabic. The academy Arabicized only nine business terms. These nine terms were Cash (””?? (””” ””’?, cash ”?? (””””””) , cashing ”’? , manager ”??, manager ”?? , management ”’? , administration ”’? , budget ”” , and balance sheet ””?? . A total of fifty Arabicized terms were evaluated by the students depending on the criteria of acceptability suggested by Cooper (1989: 61-62):
1. Knowledge: indicates whether the questionnairee knows the Arabicized term or not. It also reveals whether the questionnairee has heard it before or not.
2. Evaluation: is the extent of accepting the Arabicized equivalent of the English term by the questionnairee. Besides, it is concerned with the extent of considering this Arabicized equivalent as a good one.
3. Usage: refers to the frequency of using the Arabicized term by the questionnairee.
4. Proficiency: shows the ability of the questionnairee to utilize the Arabicized term within the correct context accurately.
5. Adoption: is the use of Arabicized term consistently, repetitively and acceptably.
Each criterion of acceptability was tested using a five-point Likert scale. The minimum degree was (1) while (5) was the maximum one. Number (1) stood for strongly disagree while (5) was strongly agree.
The third section (items 1-12) examined the attitude of business students toward Arabicization. The fourth section consisted of four questions. Question thirteen intended to investigate the questionnairee’s evaluation of the work of the Jordan Academy of Arabic in the Arabicization of business terms. Question fourteen aimed at getting the sample subjects’ proposed procedures to be followed by the academy in the process of Arabicization of English business terms and promoting them. Finally, the last two questions (15-16) were about the sample subjects’ understandability of the questionnaire and the accuracy of their responses in the questionnaire.
3.3.2 Procedures of Data Collection
The main purpose of the present study was to measure the acceptability of the Arabicized business terms. Forty one problematic Arabicized terms were selected randomly from many Arabic and Arabicized sources. In addition, All Arabicized business terms published by the Jordan Academy of Arabic were taken. They were nine terms. In order to make sure that all of the Arabicized business terms published by the academy were covered in the questionnaire, the researcher went to the academy and talked to some employees there and they told the researcher they were nine terms. The sum of the terms in the questionnaire was fifty. Based on AL-Abed AL-Haq (1998a), the questionnaire was designed. It included these fifty terms to be evaluated by the students depending on Cooper’s (1989) criteria of acceptability. Sociolinguistic variables were included in the questionnaire through the questions about gender, university, and major. The questionnaire also consisted of twelve questions which investigated the students’ attitudes toward Arabicization of business terms. Other two questions aimed at examining the questionnairee’s evaluation of the work of the Jordan Academy of Arabic. They also aimed at getting proposed procedures by the questionnairee to be followed by the academy in promoting the Arabicized business terms. Copies of the questionnaire were distributed to two hundred business students at the University of Jordan and Yarmouk University. The researcher herself distributed the copies of the questionnaire to control and follow the process of completing all items of the questionnaire by the students. Finally, the copies of the questionnaire were collected and the data were analyzed.
3.4 Data Analysis
The two hundred copies of the questionnaire were collected and using the statistical package called Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), the data were analyzed after being classified and fed into the computer. The package gives frequencies and percentages utilized in sample distributions according to different criteria, ascending and descending orders utilized in ranking procedures, and standard deviations and means utilized in understanding responses.
Moreover, the five-point Likert scale was used in which the low range of means showed strong objection. On the contrary, the high range of means showed weak objection.
For the purpose of measuring the variances in responses with the change of the variables, ANOVA and T-Test were used. To show the correlation between variables, p-value on correlation coefficient was utilized.
Chapter four: Results and Discussion
4.1 Introduction
The central issue of the study was to measure the extent of acceptability of the Arabicized business terms, the extent in which the five criteria of acceptability (knowledge, usage, evaluation, adoption, and proficiency) influenced by gender, university , and major, and the degree to which the five criteria of acceptability correlated with each other. The aim of the present study was also to understand the attitudes of business students toward the idea of Arabicization and the work of the Jordan Academy of Arabic.
The present chapter is divided into four main sections. The title of the first section is “Acceptability of Arabicized Business Terms”. The second section aims to show and discuss the attitudes of business students toward the idea of Arabicization. The evaluation of the work of the Jordan Academy of Arabic by the students is outlined in the third section. In the final section of this chapter, the understandability of the questionnaire by the students is provided.
4.2 Acceptability of Arabicized Business Terms
4.2.1 Introduction
Knowledge, evaluation, usage, proficiency and adoption were the criteria used to measure the extent of acceptability of the Arabicized business terms. The extent of acceptability was the means of the responses of the questionnairees of the aforementioned criteria for every business term. Depending on a five-point Likert scale, the extent of acceptability for every Arabicized business term in every criterion of acceptability was interpreted as very low (1.00 to 1.49), low (1.50 to 2.49), moderate (2.50 to 3.49), high (3.50 to 4.49), very high (4.50 to 5.00). The same scale was applied on the findings related to the five criteria of acceptability and to the findings related to the extent of acceptability of every business term.
The mean of every criterion for every term is shown in Table 2. The overall average (extent of acceptability) for every term is also provided in the table. The table also provides the average mean for every criterion of the fifty terms.
4.2.2 Criteria of Acceptability
Every criterion will be discussed separately.
1. Knowledge: The average mean for this criterion was 2.9303. This revealed that this criterion fell in moderate level. This indicated that the majority of the students were familiar with the Arabicized terms in their field of study but there were still others who did not have knowledge of these terms.
2. Evaluation: The average mean for this criterion was 2.8809. Like knowledge criterion, evaluation criterion was ranked in moderate level. This showed a moderate extent of acceptance of the Arabicized equivalents of the English terms by the students.
3. Usage: The mean average of this criterion was 2.8177. This value revealed a moderate frequency of using the Arabicized business terms by the students among them and with their professors.
4. Proficiency: The average mean for this criterion for the fifty terms was 2.8321. This showed a moderate ability of the business students in utilizing the Arabicized business terms within the correct context accurately.
No English Term Arabic Term Knowledge (Mean) Evaluation (Mean) Usage (Mean) Proficiency (Mean) Adoption (Mean) Extent of Acceptability
1 Absorptive capacity ”” ”””’? 2.780 2.770 2.950 2.905 2.725 2.85125
2 Abstract of a patent ””” ””’? 3.355 2.825 2.885 2.825 2.760 2.9725
3 Abstract of bank funds ””” ””’? 3.180 2.870 2.685 2.815 2.675 2.8857
4 Abusive tax shelter ””””””’? 2.710 2.685 2.675 2.625 2.420 2.67375
5 Acceleration of maturity ”””””’? 3.140 2.995 2.790 3.190 2.880 3.02875
6 Account deactivation ”””’? 3.265 3.035 2.628 2.945 2.805 2.968711
7 Cash ””?? (””” ””’?) 3.755 3.060 2.790 3.050 2.995 3.16375
8 Cash ”?? (””””””) 3.770 3.120 2.945 3.145 3.130 3.245
9 Cashing ”’? 3.500 3.205 2.915 3.085 2.920 3.17625
10 Credit worthiness appraisal ”””” 2.410 2.780 2.390 2.470 2.265 ”??
2.5125
11 Endorser ””’? 2.395 2.305 2.640 2.440 2.410 2.445
12 Clearing agreement ”””” 2.570 2.495 2.730 2.535 2.175 2.5825
13 Porterage ”””’? 2.655 2.645 2.875 2.775 2.680 2.7375
14 Oligopoly ”” ”’? 2.985 3.010 3.200 3.010 2.790 3.05125
15 Annuitant ”’? 2.305 2.465 2.495 2.385 2.285 2.4125
16 Watered stock ””” 2.288 2.409 2.462 2.381 2.270 2.384518
17 Bond amortization ”””?? 2.503 2.462 2.543 2.400 2.140 2.476671
18 Liability for endorsement ”” ””?? 2.585 2.305 2.540 2.285 2.315 2.42875
19 Compensatory balance ”” ”” 2.500 2.510 2.715 2.465 2.580 2.5475
20 Gray market ”””” 2.180 2.385 2.568 2.535 2.360 2.416771
21 Manager ”?? 2.995 2.965 2.990 2.955 2.915 2.97625
22 Manager ”?? 3.305 3.465 3.180 3.460 3.420 3.3525
23 Management ”’? 3.140 3.290 2.890 3.040 3.200 3.09
24 Administration ”’? 3.315 3.460 3.185 3.300 3.425 3.315
25 Interim financial statements ”” ”””’? 2.735 2.885 2.735 2.595 2.545 2.7375
26 Depreciation ””’? 3.021 3.111 3.057 3.000 2.926 3.04712
27 Adjusted trial balance ””””””?? 2.807 3.254 2.990 3.180 2.895 3.058008
28 Non-current liabilities ”””””””?? 3.055 3.285 2.980 3.070 2.765 3.0975
29 Purchase allowances ”””””?? 3.150 3.180 3.005 3.300 3.055 3.15875
30 Contra revenue account ””” ””?? 2.985 2.905 2.744 2.754 2.764 2.846734
31 Consigned goods ”””” 3.055 2.935 2.700 2.900 2.740 2.8975
32 Cash receipts controls ””””””” 2.715 2.725 2.785 2.630 2.620 2.71375
33 Bank reconciliation ””””” 2.940 2.805 2.865 2.700 2.630 2.8275
34 Supplies expenses ””””’? 3.010 2.800 2.895 2.715 2.555 2.855
35 Transactions ””””” 3.380 3.317 3.100 3.215 3.246 3.252816
36 Budget ”” 3.258 3.315 2.919 3.111 3.010 3.151134
37 Balance sheet ””?? 3.395 3.405 3.111 3.125 3.185 3.259074
38 Labor relations ”””””?? 3.170 2.874 2.765 2.720 2.628 2.882353
39 Charts of accounts ”” ””’? 2.850 2.730 2.725 2.754 2.475 2.764706
40 Capitalized value ”” ””’? 2.695 2.680 2.720 2.565 2.480 2.665
41 Shift premium ””””?? 2.495 2.490 2.520 2.480 2.460 2.49625
42 Time wages ””””’? 3.101 3.165 3.241 3.206 2.980 3.178168
43 Underwriting ””””” 3.040 2.830 2.745 2.910 2.640 2.88125
44 Commercial credit companies ”””” ””?? 2.990 2.795 2.765 2.965 2.730 2.87875
45 Functional middlemen ”””””?? 2.770 2.705 2.680 2.595 2.585 2.6875
46 Standardization and grading ””””” 2.425 2.305 2.535 2.391 2.340 2.413836
47 Partnership ”””’? 2.910 2.945 2.935 2.910 2.900 2.925
48 Commercial draft ”””” 2.875 2.745 2.695 2.580 2.625 2.72375
49 Preferred stock ”” ””’? 3.065 3.085 3.005 3.020 3.100 3.04375
50
Current liabilities ”” ””?? 3.030 3.270 2.995 3.190 3.075 3.12125
Average Mean 2.9303 2.8809 2.8177 2.8321 2.7299 2.8381
5. Adoption: Table 2 shows that the average mean for this criterion for the fifty terms. It was 2.7299. This criterion revealed the use of the Arabicized terms consistently, repetitively and acceptably. For the average mean for this criterion fell in the moderate level, it could be said that the students’ way of using the Arabicized business terms was nearly consistent, repetitive and accepted. It was noted that the average for this criterion of the fifty terms was the lowest one among other criteria of acceptability.
By discussing the average mean of the five criteria for the fifty terms separately, it could be noticed that every criterion of acceptability affected the other. All of the overall averages of them fell in the moderate level and their values of means were very near to each others. More about the correlation among these criteria will be discussed in the next sections.
4.2.3 Extent of Acceptability
Investigating the extent of acceptability of the Arabicized business terms among the students was one of the main goals of the present study. The extent of acceptability of all of the fifty terms was 2.8381. This indicated that the students moderately accepted these Arabicized business terms. It also shed light on the role of the Jordan Academy of Arabic in increasing the extent of acceptability of the Arabicized business terms among the students. The role of the academy needs to be enhanced to increase the extent of acceptability to be in high level.
According to Table 2, the term with the highest extent of acceptability in relation to others was (manager: ”??) followed by (administration: ”’?) and (balance sheet: ””??). The term with the lowest extent of acceptability in relation to others was (annuitant: ”’?) followed by (standardization and grading: ”””””) and (gray market: ””””). Thus, it could be noticed that the term (manager: ”??) was the most accepted term among others. On the contrary, the term (Annuitant: ”’?) was the lowest accepted term among the fifty terms. Thus, it could be said that the term (Annuitant: ”’?) should be Arabicized again, taking into consideration the role of the users (students) in the process of Arabicization to produce an acceptable term.
As shown in Table 3, the majority of the terms which constituted 84% were in the moderate level of acceptability and 16% of the terms were in the low level. It was noticed that there were no terms in the highest, high, and lowest levels. Thus, it could be said that the majority of the students were aware of these terms and only few of them did not know them. Moreover, these results indicated that the students considered the majority of these Arabicized terms as good equivalents for the English terms. Additionally, the students used and adopted these Arabicized terms moderately with a moderate ability to utilize them in correct context. Accordingly, more are required to increase the students’ awareness of these terms and to raise their ability and frequency of using them in correct contexts consistently. First and foremost, their evaluation of these Arabicized terms should also be raised.
4.2.4 Correlation among the Criteria of Acceptability
As Table 4 shows, all of the criteria of acceptability were correlated with each other. In other words, they were inter-reliant and they affected each other. For example, the terms “watered stock” (”””) and “annuitant” (”’?) had low means in knowledge criterion. Consequently, the same terms had low means in the other criteria of acceptability. As a result, being unfamiliar of these terms leads to the inability of utilizing the terms correctly, consistently, acceptably and frequently on the part of the
Table 3. Distribution of the Fifty Terms According to the Extent of Acceptability
Extent of Acceptability Number of Terms Percentage
Very High
High
Moderate
Low
Very Low
Total 0
42
8
50 0%
0%
84%
16%
0%
100%
Table 4. Correlation among the Criteria of Acceptability
KNOWLEDGE EVALUATION USAGE PROFICIENCY Adoption
KNOWLEDGE Pearson Correlation 1 .786** .396** .327** .316
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000
N 200 200 200 200 200
EVALUATION Pearson Correlation .786** 1 .446** .307** .271**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000
N 200 200 200 200 200
USAGE Pearson Correlation .396** .446** 1 .341** .223**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .002
N 200 200 200 200 200
PROFICIENCY Pearson Correlation .327** .307** .341** 1 .726**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000
N 200 200 200 200 200
ADOPTION Pearson Correlation .316** .271** .223** .726** 1**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .002 .000
N 200 200 200 200 200
students. Consequently, the extent of considering the Arabicized equivalents for the English terms as good ones will also be low.
4.2.5 Correlation between Sociolinguistic Variables and the Criteria of Acceptability
The aim of this section is to show the correlation between the sociolinguistic variables, namely, gender, university and major, and the criteria of acceptability. Table 5 shows the mean in every criterion according to a given sociolinguistic variable. Additionally, the extent of acceptability in each variable is shown in the table. The symbols K., E., U., P., and A. stand for knowledge, evaluation, usage, proficiency and adoption respectively. In this table, UJ is the abbreviation of the University of Jordan while YU represents Yarmouk University.
Table 5 shows that the male students’ extent of acceptability of the Arabicized equivalents of the English terms was higher than the female students. Regarding university variable the mean of the all criteria of acceptability for YU was higher than the UJ’s, except for proficiency criterion. As for major variable, the highest extent of acceptability was scored by Management Information System (MIS). Nevertheless, Islamic Banking got the lowest mean.
To be more precise regarding the correlation between the sociolinguistic variable given in the present study and the criteria of acceptability mentioned previously, ANOVA and T-Test were run on every criterion of acceptability and every sociolinguistic variable given in the present study.
Table 6 shows the results of ANOVA test on major variable. There was no significant correlation found between the criteria of acceptability and major variable.
Table 5. The mean in every criterion of acceptability according to sociolinguistic variable
Varible Value K E U P A Extent of Acceptability
Gender MALE 3.0448 3.0035 2.9154 2.7606 2.6995 2.8848
FEMALE 2.8365 2.7805 2.7377 2.8905 2.7547 2.7999
University UJ 2.8662 2.7764 2.7959 2.9111 2.7970 2.8292
YU 2.9944 2.9853 2.8395 2.7531 2.6627 2.8470
Major Accounting 2.9655 2.9299 2.6508 2.7984 2.6764 2.8042
Business Administration 3.0200 3.0471 3.0371 2.8186 2.7445 2.9334
Marketing 2.8700 2.8175 2.8325 2.7875 2.4775 2.7570
Finance and Banking Sciences 2.8805 2.9368 2.9236 2.7175 2.6076 2.8132
Economics 2.9604 2.9499 2.8186 2.9561 2.8514 2.9072
Public Administration 3.2026 3.1877 2.9210 2.6762 2.4206 2.8817
Islamic Banking 2.7810 2.6364 2.6649 2.7500 2.8160 2.7292
Finance 2.8268 2.6841 2.8641 2.8776 2.8094 2.8124
Management Information Systems (MIS) 3.1045 3.0925 3.0005 2.8798 2.8961 2.9944
Table 6. ANOVA for the Influence of Major Variable on the Five Criteria of Acceptability
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
KNOWLEDGE Between Groups 2.099 8 .262 .912 .508
Within Groups 54.983 191 .288
Total 57.082 199
EVALUATION Between Groups 4.691 8 .586 1.827 .074
Within Groups 61.310 191 .321
Total 66.001 199
USAGE Between Groups 2.838 8 .355 .961 .468
Within Groups 70.517 191 .369
Total 73.355 199
PROFICIENCY Between Groups 1.359 8 .170 .510 .848
Within Groups 63.598 191 .333
Total 64.958 199
ADOPTION Between Groups 3.137 8 .392 1.079 .379
Within Groups 69.416 191 .363
When sig. is lower than or equal to 0.05, it indicates that there is a significant correlation between given variables. Table 6 shows that there was no correlation between the five criteria of acceptability and major variable since sig. was greater than 0.05.
Regarding Table 7, there was a significant correlation between knowledge, evaluation, and usage and gender variable. In all these cases, sig. (2-tailed) were lower than 0.05. As in Table 5, the means for these three criteria for male students were higher than the means for female students. This indicated that male students were aware of the Arabicized equivalents for these fifty English terms more than female students. Also, male students considered these Arabicized equivalents for these fifty English terms as good ones more than female students did. Besides, male students’ usage frequency of these Arabicized equivalents was higher than female students’. This result could be a pointer for the Jordan Academy of Arabic to take into consideration gender role in Arabicization process.
As for Table 8, there was an influence of university variable on evaluation criterion. As in Table 5, the mean for this criterion in YU was higher than in UJ. This showed that the students at YU considered that these Arabicized equivalents of these fifty business terms were good ones more than the students at UJ did. Depending on the results, the Jordan Academy of Arabic should take into consideration cooperating more with UJ’s administration in the Arabicization process of these fifty terms to raise evaluation criterion among the students at UJ. As for proficiency criterion, the table shows that there was a significant difference in responses among the students with the change of university variable. The ability of UJ’s students to utilize these fifty
Table 7. T-Test for the Influence of Gender on Five Criteria of Acceptability
Criteria F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed)
KNOWLEDGE Equal variances assumed 1.410 .236 2.782 198 .006
Equal variances not assumed 2.803 194.749 .006
EVALUATION Equal variances assumed 1.110 .293 2.770 198 .006
Equal variances not assumed 2.783 193.532 .006
USAGE Equal variances assumed 1.565 .212 2.076 198 .039
Equal variances not assumed 2.110 197.663 .036
PROFICIENCY Equal variances assumed .175 .676 -1.606 198 .110
Equal variances not assumed -1.594 184.065 .113
ADOPTION Equal variances assumed .282 .596 -.643 198 .521
Equal variances not assumed -.641 187.667 .523
Table 8. T-Test for the Influence of University on Five Criteria of Acceptability
Criteria F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed)
KNOWLEDGE Equal variances assumed .021 .885 -1.700 198 .091
Equal variances not assumed -1.700 198.000 .091
EVALUATION Equal variances assumed 2.322 .129 -2.601 198 .010
Equal variances not assumed -2.601 194.877 .010
USAGE Equal variances assumed .065 .800 -.506 198 .613
Equal variances not assumed -.506 197.375 .613
PROFICIENCY Equal variances assumed .021 .884 1.969 198 .050
Equal variances not assumed 1.969 197.259 .050
ADOPTION Equal variances assumed 2.853 .093 1.579 198 .116
Equal variances not assumed 1.579 193.002 .116
Arabicized terms within correct contexts accurately was higher than the ability of YU’s students. The reason behind this result will be explained in the next section.
4.3 Attitudinal Trends toward Arabicized Terms
This section aims at investigating the students’ attitude toward the idea of Arabicization and Arabicized business terms. The students’ responses to the twelve statements in the third section of the questionnaire were statistically analyzed. Five-point Likert scale was used by the students in their responses to the statements. Table 9 shows the mean of students’ responses for every statement. Additionally, the table also demonstrates the average mean for all responses of the statements by the students. This value revealed the overall students’ attitude toward the idea of Arabicization. Responses were interpreted as follows:
1. Strongly disagree (means from 1 to 1.49).
2. Disagree (means from 1.50 to 2.49).
3. Not sure (means from 2.50 to 3.49).
4. Agree (means from 3.50 to 4.49).
5. Strongly agree (means from 4.50 to 5.00).
The enthusiasm toward the idea of Arabicization because of pan-Arab identity was strong. This appeared in the second statement. The students also agreed that unifying Arabicized business terms would help in distributing them in the Arab World as it appeared in the fifth statement. Nevertheless, they were not sure about the accuracy and the clearness of the Arabicized business terms. This was revealed in the seventh statement. The lowest mean among these statements was for the eleventh statement. Its
Table 9. The Attitudes toward Arabicization
No. Statement Mean
1 My self-confidence increases when using Arabicized business terms. 3.150
2 My belonging to Arabic language is the motive to accept Arabicized business terms. 3.520
3 I think that The Arabicized business terms are better than the English business terms regarding the transformation of ideas and information. 3.025
4 I think that Arabicized business terms facilitate the interactive communication with my colleagues and professors at the department. 3.355
5 I think that unifying the Arabicized business terms helps in distributing them in the Arab World. 3.540
6 I think that the shorter the syllables are for the Arabicized business terms the more they become distributed. 3.490
7 I think that the Arabicized business terms are clear and precise. 3.165
8 I think that some of the Arabicized business terms need to be developed and rephrased. 3.590
9 My colleagues respect me when using Arabicized business terms. 3.075
10 I think that The Arabicized business terms help the Arabic language to cope with the developments in the contemporary life. 3.305
11 In my discussions with my friends, I frequently use the Arabicized business terms. 2.980
12 I am seeking to distribute and develop the Arabicized business terms. 3.035
Average Mean
3.2692
mean fell in the third level “not sure”. This indicated that the students were not sure about the frequency of using the Arabicized business terms among them. The mean of this statement, which was about to hit the low level (disagree), indicated that the students’ attitude toward the usage of these terms with their colleagues was not sufficient and it should be improved a lot to be in the high level (agree). The reason behind this result was the students’ agreement on the need for rephrasing and developing some of Arabicized business terms as it appeared in the eighth statement. The first, fourth and ninth statements were related to the issue of the use of the Arabicized business terms in students’ communication. All of the means of these statements were in the moderate level (not sure). The students were not sure if the Arabicized business terms would make it easy for them to communicate with their colleagues and professors. They were also unsure if they would be self-confident and if they would be respected by their colleagues when using the Arabicized business terms. This appeared in item one and nine respectively. As for the distribution of the Arabicized business terms, the students were uncertain if they were contributing in distributing the Arabicized business terms and developing them. This was obvious in the last statement. Moreover, they were unsure if the number of syllables of the Arabicized business terms was contributing in that. This was clear in the sixth statement. They were also unsure if the Arabicized business terms were better than the English terms in transferring the ideas and information and if these Arabicized terms would help Arabic language in coping up with the developments in the world.
Overall, the mean average for all of these statements was 3.2692, as shown in Table 9. This could be as evidence that the attitude of the students toward the idea of Arabicization of business terms was generally moderate. This indicated that the majority of the students had a positive attitude toward the idea of Arabicization of business terms and few of them had a negative attitude. This also showed that the majority of the students were aware of the process of Arabicization and the steps needed to be taken into consideration when distributing the Arabicized business terms and making them acceptable by the students. Additionally, this implied that the students were willing to use the Arabicized business terms.
In order to end this section, ANOVA and T-Test were run on the data of this section to understand the influence of the sociolinguistic variables (gender, university and major) on the students’ responses of the statements of this section.
It was found that gender had a role in responding to the sixth statement, as shown in Table 10. Female students highly thought that the brevity of the term had an important role in distributing the Arabicized business terms in the Arab world. The mean of this statement for females was 3.718. This number fell in the high level (agree). However, the mean of responses of this statement for male students was 3.211 which fell in the moderate level (not sure). This result could help the Jordan Academy of Arabic in increasing the means of knowledge, evaluation and usage of the Arabicized business terms for female students by reducing the number of syllables of the Arabicized business terms (See section 4.2.5 where the results revealed that there was a significant difference in responses due to gender).
There was a significant difference in responding to the fifth, sixth and eighth statements due to the change of university variable, as shown in Table 11. The means of the responses of these statements for UJ’s students fell in the high level (agree). However, the means of the responses of these statements for YU’s students fell in the moderate level (not sure). These results indicated that UJ’s students agreed that reducing the
Table 10. T-Test for the Influence of Gender on the Statements Regarding the Attitudes toward the Arabicization
The Statement F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed)
1. My self-confidence increases when using Arabicized business terms. Equal variances assumed .354 .553 .149 198 .881
Equal variances not assumed .148 182.082 .883
2. My belonging to Arabic language is the motive to accept Arabicized business terms. Equal variances assumed .715 .399 .023 198 .981
Equal variances not assumed .023 193.695 .981
3. I think that The Arabicized business terms are better than the English business terms regarding the transformation of ideas and information. Equal variances assumed 1.536 .217 -.125 198 .901
Equal variances not assumed -.126 194.456 .900
4. I think that Arabicized business terms facilitate the interactive communication with my colleagues and professors at the department. Equal variances assumed 6.738 .010 1.026 198 .306
Equal variances not assumed 1.043 197.697 .298
5. I think that unifying the Arabicized business terms helps in distributing them in the Arab World. Equal variances assumed .004 .951 -1.256 198 .210
Equal variances not assumed -1.259 191.686 .210
6. I think that the shorter the syllables are for the Arabicized business terms the more they become distributed. Equal variances assumed 3.837 .052 -2.725 198 .007
Equal variances not assumed -2.693 179.544 .008
7. I think that the Arabicized business terms are clear and precise. Equal variances assumed .255 .614 .914 198 .362
Equal variances not assumed .913 189.237 .363
8. I think that some of the Arabicized business terms need to be developed and rephrased. Equal variances assumed 2.997 .085 -1.837 198 .068
Equal variances not assumed -1.819 181.359 .071
9. My colleagues respect me when using Arabicized business terms. Equal variances assumed .114 .736 .916 198 .361
Equal variances not assumed .917 190.847 .360
10. I think that The Arabicized business terms help the Arabic language to cope with the developments in the contemporary life. Equal variances assumed .143 .706 -.267 198 .790
Equal variances not assumed -.266 186.963 .790
11. In my discussions with my friends, I frequently use the Arabicized business terms. Equal variances assumed .018 .894 -.127 198 .899
Equal variances not assumed -.127 190.676 .899
12. I am seeking to distribute and develop the Arabicized business terms. Equal variances assumed .091 .764 .401 198 .689
Equal variances not assumed .402 191.467 .688
Table 11. T-Test for the Influence of University on the Statements Regarding the Attitudes toward the Arabicization
Statement F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed)
1. My self-confidence increases when using Arabicized business terms. Equal variances assumed 8.038 .005 -.496 198 .621
Equal variances not assumed -.496 191.710 .621
2. My belonging to Arabic language is the motive to accept Arabicized business terms. Equal variances assumed .022 .882 -1.165 198 .246
Equal variances not assumed -1.165 197.999 .246
3. I think that The Arabicized business terms are better than the English business terms regarding the transformation of ideas and information. Equal variances assumed 1.464 .228 -1.046 198 .297
Equal variances not assumed -1.046 196.729 .297
4. I think that Arabicized business terms facilitate the interactive communication with my colleagues and professors at the department. Equal variances assumed .313 .576 -1.787 198 .075
Equal variances not assumed -1.787 197.867 .075
5. I think that unifying the Arabicized business terms helps in distributing them in the Arab World. Equal variances assumed 3.753 .054 2.621 198 .009
Equal variances not assumed 2.621 195.463 .009
6. I think that the shorter the syllables are for the Arabicized business terms the more they become distributed. Equal variances assumed 6.561 .011 4.087 198 .000
Equal variances not assumed 4.087 192.949 .000
7. I think that the Arabicized business terms are clear and precise. Equal variances assumed 6.055 .015 -.390 198 .697
Equal variances not assumed -.390 193.501 .697
8. I think that some of the Arabicized business terms need to be developed and rephrased. Equal variances assumed 12.432 .001 3.852 198 .000
Equal variances not assumed 3.852 186.584 .000
9. My colleagues respect me when using Arabicized business terms. Equal variances assumed 1.122 .291 -2.061 198 .041
Equal variances not assumed -2.061 197.537 .041
10. I think that The Arabicized business terms help the Arabic language to cope with the developments in the contemporary life. Equal variances assumed 8.008 .005 1.583 198 .115
Equal variances not assumed 1.583 189.422 .115
11. In my discussions with my friends, I frequently use the Arabicized business terms. Equal variances assumed .235 .629 .211 198 .833
Equal variances not assumed .211 197.973 .833
12. I am seeking to distribute and develop the Arabicized business terms. Equal variances assumed 4.795 .030 .155 198 .877
Equal variances not assumed .155 195.317 .877
syllables of the Arabicized business terms and unifying them would help in distributing them in the Arab world. They also agreed that some of the Arabicized business terms should be restructured and developed. These thoughts could be the reasons which drove UJ’s business students not to consider the Arabicized equivalents of the fifty English terms in this study as good equivalents as the same degree as YU’s students did (See Section 4.2.5).
Deeming to the ninth statement, there was a significant difference in responding to it with the change of university variable. Students at UJ respect each other when using Arabicized terms. The students’ proficiency at UJ, as shown in Section 4.2.5, was higher than YU’s. Ninth statement is the explanation behind this result. Since the students at UJ respect each other when using Arabicized terms in their communication, their ability to use these terms within correct contexts accurately will be enhanced.
Regarding major variable, ANOVA test revealed that there was a significant difference in responding to sixth and eighth statements. This is shown in Table 12 where sig. for these statements was less than 0.05.
Economics, Public Administrations, Islamic Banking and Finance students highly thought that the brevity of the Arabicized business terms would help in their distribution in the Arab World. Marketing, Finance and Banking Sciences, Economics, Islamic Banking and Finance students agreed that some of the Arabicized business terms should be restructured and developed. To distribute the Arabicized business terms among these majors, the Jordan Academy of Arabic should take the issue of brevity of the terms into consideration in the process of Arabicization. They also should try to develop and restructure some of these Arabicized terms and not to publish them as
Table 12. ANOVA for the Influence of Major on the Statements Regarding the Attitudes toward the Arabicization
Statements Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
1. My self-confidence increases when using Arabicized business terms. Between Groups 12.423 8 1.553 .758 .640
Within Groups 391.077 191 2.048
Total 403.500 199
2. My belonging to Arabic language is the motive to accept Arabicized business terms. Between Groups 6.806 8 .851 .566 .805
Within Groups 287.114 191 1.503
Total 293.920 199
3. I think that The Arabicized business terms are better than the English business terms regarding the transformation of ideas and information. Between Groups 17.359 8 2.170 1.081 .378
Within Groups 383.516 191 2.008
Total 400.875 199
4. I think that Arabicized business terms facilitate the interactive communication with my colleagues and professors at the department. Between Groups 8.379 8 1.047 .530 .833
Within Groups 377.416 191 1.976
Total 385.795 199
5. I think that unifying the Arabicized business terms helps in distributing them in the Arab World. Between Groups 21.370 8 2.671 1.583 .132
Within Groups 322.310 191 1.687
Total 343.680 199
6. I think that the shorter the syllables are for the Arabicized business terms the more they become distributed. Between Groups 28.936 8 3.617 2.139 .034
Within Groups 323.044 191 1.691
Total 351.980 199
7. I think that the Arabicized business terms are clear and precise. Between Groups 9.058 8 1.132 .697 .694
Within Groups 310.497 191 1.626
Total 319.555 199
8. I think that some of the Arabicized business terms need to be developed and rephrased. Between Groups 37.482 8 4.685 3.255 .002
Within Groups 274.898 191 1.439
Total 312.380 199
9. My colleagues respect me when using Arabicized business terms. Between Groups 14.692 8 1.836 1.127 .347
Within Groups 311.183 191 1.629
Total 325.875 199
10. I think that The Arabicized business terms help the Arabic language to cope with the developments in the contemporary life. Between Groups 17.412 8 2.176 1.303 .244
Within Groups 318.983 191 1.670
Total 336.395 199
11. In my discussions with my friends, I frequently use the Arabicized business terms. Between Groups 10.294 8 1.287 .711 .682
Within Groups 345.626 191 1.810
Total 355.920 199
12. I am seeking to distribute and develop the Arabicized business terms. Between Groups 5.609 8 .701 .369 .936
Within Groups 363.146 191 1.901
Total 368.755 199
they are when producing a separate pamphlet for Arabicized terms in business field in the future.
4.4 Evaluation of the Work of the Jordan Academy of Arabic
The Jordan Academy of Arabic has not published a separate pamphlet for Arabicized business terms yet. This reveals the poor role of the academy in the Arabicization of terms in business fields.
The academy has only Arabicized nine terms. They are: Cash (””?? (””” ””’?, cash ”?? (””””””) , cashing ”’? , manager ”??, manager ”?? , management ”’? , administration ”’? , budget ”” , and balance sheet ””??. As in Table 2, the extent of acceptability of these terms was 3.1921. This value fell in the moderate level. This indicated that the Arabicized business terms produced by the academy were moderately accepted by the business students.
However, these terms only constitute 18% of the fifty terms given in this study. Above that, these terms are not unified. For example, manager has two meanings. They are ”??)) or (”??). The same thing is applied on the term (cash).
For this poor role on the part of the Jordan Academy of Arabic, an open question was included in the questionnaire in an attempt to understand why the academy is lagging far behind this issue in business field as students thought.
Many of them believed that the failure of those who were responsible for following up the process of Arabicization was one of the reasons behind this poor status. They also thought that the scarce of translators and researchers in this field was one of the causes of this condition. Moreover, they considered that non-unified terms led to this and the continuous and rapid developments in business field could be an obstacle in front of the academy in producing acceptable terms.
4.5 Understandability of the Questionnaire
In order to measure the understandability of the questionnaire to show the degree of the reliability of its results and the extent of the accuracy of its conclusions, two questions were included in the last section of the questionnaire. The questions were: Did you understand the questionnaire? And do you consider your answers as being accurate?
As shown in Table 13, 49.5% of the students understood the questionnaire very highly and 45% understood it highly. Consequently, Table 14 which shows the accuracy level of the students’ responses to the questionnaire illustrates that 56% of the students’ responses were very highly accurate and 18.5% of their responses were highly accurate. This indicated that the majority of the students understood the questionnaire and answered it accurately, leading to correct and reliable results. This test of reliability was also supported by another one mentioned in Chapter Three called Cronbach’s Alpha which revealed highly reliable results of the questionnaire (See Chapter Three, Section 3.3.1).
Table 13. Level of Understandability of the Questionnaire
Understandability Level Frequency Percentage
Very Low 17 8.5
Low 11 5.5
Moderate 28 14.0
High 45 22.5
Very High 99 49.5
Total 200 100.0
Table 14. Level of Accuracy of the Responses in the Questionnaire
Accuracy Level Frequency Percentage
Very Low 12 6.0
Low 14 7.0
Moderate 25 12.5
High 37 18.5
Very High 112 56.0
Total 200 100.0
Chapter Five: Conclusions and Recommendations
5.1 Conclusions
The results of this study revealed the following conclusions regarding the five criteria of acceptability:
1. Arabicized business terms were moderately familiar to their users.
2. The extent of acceptability of the Arabicized equivalents of English business terms and the frequency of using them were moderate.
3. The ability of the users in utilizing the Arabicized equivalents for English business terms was generally fair.
4. The users’ way in using the Arabicized business terms was somewhat consistent, repetitive and accepted.
5. The five criteria of acceptability strongly affected each others.
6. Gender and university variables produced significant differences among the users concerning the five criteria of acceptability. There was a correlation between gender and the criteria of acceptability, namely knowledge, evaluation and usage. Besides, there was a correlation between university and the criteria of acceptability, specifically evaluation and proficiency criteria.
The conclusions regarding the extent of acceptability of the Arabicized business terms by their users are as follows:
1. Generally, the Arabicized equivalents of the English business terms were moderately accepted by the users.
2. Overall, gender, university and major did not cause differences among users regarding the moderate extent of acceptability of Arabicized business terms.
The following points go over the main findings regarding the attitudinal trends of the users toward the idea of Arabicization and the Arabicization of business terms:
1. The enthusiasm among the users toward the idea of Arabicization because of pan-Arab identity was very strong.
2. Unifying Arabicized business terms would help in distributing them in the Arab World.
3. The Arabicized business terms should be rephrased and developed.
4. Overall, the users’ attitude toward the Arabicized business terms was somewhat positive.
5. Students at UJ respect each other when using Arabicized business terms in their communication.
6. University and major variables caused significant differences regarding the issue of rephrasing and developing the Arabicized business terms. Like UJ’s students, Marketing, Finance and Banking Sciences, Economics, Islamic Banking, and Finance students agreed that the Arabicized business terms should be restructured and developed.
7. UJ’s students agreed that unifying the Arabicized business terms also would help in distributing them.
8. Females and UJ’s students agreed that the brevity of the Arabicized business terms would help in distributing them in the Arab World. Correspondingly, Economics, Public Administration, Islamic Banking, and Finance students agreed with females and UJ’s students regarding the issue of brevity.
The conclusions relating to the evaluation of the work of the Jordan Academy of Arabic are as follows:
1. The poor role of the academy was revealed through two main points:
a) The academy has not published a separate pamphlet for Arabicized business terms yet.
b) The academy published a very few number of Arabicized business terms and some of them are not unified, having two equivalents in Arabic for the same English term.
2. The reasons behind the failure of the Jordan Academy of Arabic from the users’ point of view were as follows:
a) The scarce of translators and researchers in Arabicization issue in the field of business.
b) The existence of non-unified Arabicized business terms.
c) The failure in following-up the rapid and continuous developments in this field.
d) There is no coordination between the academy and the specialists in supporting the Arabicization process in business field.
5.2 Recommendations
The following recommendations can be suggested:
1. Encouraging and supporting translators and researchers in enhancing the process of Arabicization in business field.
2. Unifying the Arabicized business terms through coordination among the language academies in the Arab World.
3. The academy should coordinate with the specialists to produce a pamphlet for Arabicized business terms to support the Arabicization process.
4. The academy should take into consideration the criteria of acceptability in the Arabicization process to ensure that the future Arabicized business terms will be accepted and so distributed rapidly.
5. There should be an organized plan by the academy in the process of promoting the Arabicized terms. This process of promoting should be supported by slogans which convey highly emotive ideas regarding pan-Arab identity.
6. Since gender plays a vital role in the process of Arabicization, the academy should raise awareness among females regarding the importance of using Arabicized terms. Additionally, since the brevity of Arabicized terms contributes in raising the extent of acceptance of Arabicized terms among females, the academy should produce concise and precise terms.
7. Awareness campaigns should be organized at the universities in an attempt to raise awareness among the students of the importance of using Arabic in their fields of study.
8. There should be political interference in supporting the process of Arabicization.
This study is the first step towards enhancing the understanding of gender role in Arabicization process. This observation has many implications for research into gender role in the future. The present method could be applied to other sample and other field of study to enhance the terminology of Arabic language. This study could be a useful aid for decision makers in the Arabicization process to get acceptable Arabicized business terms in the future.
REFERENCES
AL-Abed AL-Haq, F. (1998a), Language Planning and Term Planning: Criteria for Accebtability, Proceedings of the International Conference on Professional Communication and Knowledge Transfer, Terminology Work and Knowledge Transfer, 2, Vienna 24-26 August, 1998, 2-19.
AL-Abed AL-Haq, F. (1998b), Toward a Theoretical Framework for the Study of Planning Arabicization. In: A. Shunnaq, C. Dollerup & M. Saraireh (Eds.), Issues in Translation, (pp. 53-68), Irbid, Irbid National University and Jordanian Translators’ Assosiation.
AL-Abed AL-Haq, F. and Al-Masaeid, A. L. (2009), Islam and language planning in the Arab world: a case study in Jordan. Iranian Journal of Language Studies, 3(3), 267-302.
Al-Assal, M. (1998), Acceptability and Diffusion of Some Borrowed and Native Terms in Medical and Engineering Science. M.A. Thesis, Yarmouk University, Irbid, Jordan.
Al-Assal, M. and Smadi, O. (2012), Arabicization and Arabic Expanding Techniques Used in Science Lectures in Two Arab Universities. Asian Perspectives in the Arts and Humanities, 2(1), 15-38.
.
Al-Kharabsheh, A. A.-D. (1999), The Marketability of Different Technical Arabicized Terms Issued by The Jordan Academy of Arabic language. M.A. Thesis, Yarmouk University, Irbid, Jordan.
Al-Oleimat, A. (1998), The Attitudes of the Jordanian Members of Parliament towards Arabicization from a Language Planning Perspective. M.A. Thesis, Yarmouk University, Irbid, Jordan.
AL-Qahtani, S. H. (2000), Arabization in Written Discourse in Saudi Arabia. PH.D. Thesis, Ball State University, Muncie, Indiana, United States.
al-Qurashi, K. O. A. (1982), The Feasibility of the Arabic Language as Medium of Instruction in Sciences. PH.D. Thesis, Indiana University, Indiana, United States.
.
AL-Sakran, L. S. (2004), Arabicization of Agricultural Terms from a Terminology Planning Perspective. M.A. Thesis, Yarmouk University, Irbid, Jordan.
Al-Smadi, M. (1997), Language Planning and Arabicization of Military Terms. M.A. Thesis, Yarmouk University, Irbid, Jordan.
Bentaouet-Kattan, R. (1999), Language Planning in Education Reform: The Case of Morocco. PH.D. Thesis, Georgetown University, Washington, United States.
Cooper, R. (1989), Language Planning and Social Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Diknash, S. (1998), An Evaluative Study of the Arabicized Nursing Terms from a Language Planning Perspective. M.A. Thesis, Yarmouk University, Irbid, Jordan.
El-Fadni, S. (2004), Arabicization in Higher Education: The Case of Medical Colleges in The Sudan. PH.D. Thesis, University of Leicester, Leicester, England.
El-Khafaifi, H. M. (1985), The Role of The Cairo Academy in Coining Arabic Scientific Terminology: An Historical and Linguistic Evaluation. PH.D. Thesis, The University of Utah, Salt Lake City, United States.
Farghal, M. (2012), Advanced Issues in Arabic-English Translation Studies. Kuwait: Academic Publication Council-University of Kuwait.
Fowler, H. W., Fowler, F. G., and Murray, J. A. H. (1919), The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Current English. Oxford: The Clarendon Press.
Jaied, W. M. (2010), Aspectos Sem??nticos de la Hip??rbole en Algunos Textos ??rabes Traducidos al Castellano. PH.D. Thesis, Universidad de Granada, Granada, Spain.
Halloush, L. A. (2000), The Arabicization of Medical Terms in Light of Language and Terminlogy Planning. M.A. Thesis, Yarmouk University, Irbid, Jordan.
Hawamdeh, F. (2004), Term Planing: A Case Study of Weather Terms. M.A. Thesis, Yarmouk University, Irbid, Jordan.
Mahasneh, B. (2002), Evaluation of The Rendetions of Internet Terms into Arabic. M.A. Thesis, Yarmouk University, Irbid, Jordan.
The International Information Centre for Terminology (2005), Guidelines for Terminology Policies: Formulating and Implementing Terminology Policy in Language Communities, Paris, France.
O’kour, E. (1999), Language Planning and Arabicization of Carpentry terms. M.A. Thesis, Yarmouk University, Irbid, Jordan.
Qoqazeh, M. (2013), The Feasibility of Al-Lisan Al-Arabi Journal’s Arabicization of the Ophthalmology Terms. M.A. Thesis, Yarmouk University, Irbid, Jordan.
Rababah, H. (1995), Translating English Medical Terminology in Arabic: The Problem of Synonymy. M.A. Thesis, Yarmouk University, Irbid, Jordan.
Rey, A. (Ed.). (1995), Essays on Terminology (Vol. 9). Amesterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Saad, Z. (1992), Language Planning and Policy Attitudes: A Case Study of Arabization in Algeria. Columbia University, New York, United States.
Sager, J. C. (1990), Practical Course in Terminology Processing. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
””””””””” (1984)””’?… ””””’?: ”””” ”””””.
” ”” ”’? (2001)””””””” ””” ”’?: ” ””””??.
”””’? (1995)”””””” ””. ””’? 5 (10): 11-47.
”””” ””” (2010)””” ”””””: ””””” ”” ”””””””: ”””””.
””””?? (2001)””” ””””” ””” ”??: ” ””””’?.
””” ”’? (2007)””””’?: ””””” ”””” ””””: ”” ””””??.
””””?? (1980)””” ”” ””””””??: ”””””””’?.
”””” (1990)”” ””” ”” ””??: ””””. ”” ””?? (34): 155-162.
””””?? (1974)””””””’?: ” ””””: ”””””””??.
”” ”?? (1988)””’?: ” ”””””. ”” ””?? 17 (202?? 203): 137-141.
”” ” ””?? (1987)”” ””””” ””””””??: ””” ””””’?.
” ”””” (1990)”””””””””” ””””” ””??: ” ”””’?.
”””?? ( 1993)”””””””””” ” ”” ””’?. ”” ””?? (37): 169-174.
Appendix (1)
The Questionnaire in Arabic
”””””
”””””””” ””””?? “”””” ””” ”””” ””’?” ”” ”””””””””””” ”” ”””” ””””” ”” ”” ”””” ””” ”??.
”””””” ” ”””” ””””””” ” ”””” ”””””””””” ””. ””” ””” ””” ”””” ”””””.
”””””
”””””””””: ””””””””””””?? (x) ”””””
1. ”’?:
( ) ” ( ) ”??
2. ””??:
( ) ””’? ( ) ””??
3. ””’?: ( ” )
”””’?: ” ”””””””” ”??.
””””’?: ”” ””” ” ””””””” ””””””””””””””””’?:
( 1 ) ””’? ( 2 ) ”’? ( 3 ) ”” ( 4 ) ”’? ( 5 ) ””””””??:
1. ””??: ”””””” ”” ”””” ”.
2. ””??: ””” ”””” ””.
3. ”””: ””””””” ””””??.
4. ””??: ””””””” ””””” ”” ””””””””??.
5. ””: ””””””””” ””””””””’?.
”””” ”””’?
English ”””””
Arabic ””??
Knowledge
1 2 3 4 5 ””??
Evaluation
1 2 3 4 5 ”””
Usage
1 2 3 4 5
””??
Proficiency
1 2 3 4 5 ””
Adoption
1 2 3 4 5
1 Absorptive capacity ”” ”””’?
2 Abstract of a patent ””” ””’?
3 Abstract of bank funds ””” ””’?
4 Abusive tax shelter ””””””’?
5 Acceleration of maturity ”””””’?
6 Account deactivation ”””’?
7 Cash ””?? (””” ””’?)
8 Cash ”?? (””””””)
9 Cashing ”’?
10 Credit worthiness appraisal ””””
11 Endorser ””’?
12 Clearing agreement ””””
13 Porterage ”””’?
14 Oligopoly ”” ”’?
15 Annuitant ”’?
16 Watered stock ”””
17 Bond amortization ”””??
18 Liability for endorsement ”” ””??
19 Compensatory balance ”” ””
20 Gray market ””””
21 Manager ”??
22 Manager ”??
23 Management ”’?
24 Administration ”’?
25 Interim financial statements ”” ”””’?
26 Depreciation ””’?
27 Adjusted trial balance ””””””??
28 Non-current liabilities ”””””””??
29 Purchase allowances ”””””??
30 Contra revenue account ””” ””??
31 Consigned goods ””””
32 Cash receipts controls ”””””””
33 Bank reconciliation ”””””
34 Supplies expenses ””””’?
35 Transactions ”””””
36 Budget ””
37 Balance sheet ””??
38 Labor relations ”””””??
39 Charts of accounts ”” ””’?
40 Capitalized value ”” ””’?
41 Shift premium ””””??
42 Time wages ””””’?
43 Underwriting ”””””
44 Commercial credit companies ”””” ””??
45 Functional middlemen ”””””??
46 Standardization and grading ”””””
47 Partnership ”””’?
48 Commercial draft ””””
49 Preferred stock ”” ””’?
50 Current liabilities ”” ”””” ””: ”””””” ”””””” ”.
””” ”””””” ””””””””””””””” ””””””’?:
” ””” (1) / ” ”’? (2) / ” ”’? (3) / ”’? (4) / ””” (5)
””””””
1. ””” ”””””””””” ””??
2. ”””””” ”””””””” ””””’?
3. ””””””” ””””””””” ”””” ” ” ””” ””’?.
4. ””””””” ”””””””” ”” ”””””.
5. ””””” ””””””” ”” ”””” ”””’?.
6. ”””” ”””””” ”””” ””””” ””” ””’?.
7. ””””””” ”””” ””.
8. ”””””””” ”””” ” ”””””??.
9. ”””””” ”” ”””””””.
10. ””””””” ”””” ”””” ” ”” ””””.
11. ”” ””””””” ”””””” ””.
12. ”””””””” ”””””.
”””’?: ””””””’?.
””””””””” ”’?:
13. ””” ””” ””” ””””””” ””””” ”””” ” ” ” ””””” ””” ””””” ”” ””””’?
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
14. ”””””” ”””” ”””” ””” ”””” ””’?
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
15. ”” ” ”””??
( 1 ) ””””?? ( 2 ) ”””?? ( 3 ) ”””’? ( 4 ) ”””?? ( 5 ) ””””??
16. ””””””??
( 1 ) ””””?? ( 2 ) ”””?? ( 3 ) ”””’? ( 4 ) ”””?? ( 5 ) ””””??
Appendix 2
The Questionnaire in English
Dear respondent,
The researcher conducts a study entitled “Arabicization of Business Terms from Terminology Planning Perspective”. The aim of this study is to investigate your attitudes toward the Arabicized business terms and the work of the Jordan Academy of Arabic.
Please, answer the questionnaire’s questions completely and scientifically. The data will be used privately for scientific goals. Your cooperation and your answers will help in achieving the aims of the study and causing the success of it.
Regards
The researcher
Sarah Al-Essa
First Section: The respondent’s personal information
Please, put (x) in the appropriate place.
1. Gender:
( ) Male ( ) Female
2. University
( ) The University of Jordan ( ) Yarmouk University
3. Major (write)
Second Section: Some of business terms to give your opinion about.
Dear respondent,
Please, give your opinion about the following Arabicized business terms by putting the suitable number for every criterion:
(1) Very Low (2) Low ( 3) Moderate (4) High (5) Very High
The criteria are:
1. Knowledge: refers to your familiarity with the Arabicized term and if you have heard it before or not.
2. Evaluation: refers to the extent of accepting the Arabicized term as a good equivalent for the English one.
3. Usage: refers to the frequency of using the Arabicized term.
4. Proficiency: refers to the ability of using the Arabicized term within correct contexts.
5. Adoption: refers to the usage of the Arabicized term repetitively, consistently, and acceptably among other alternatives.
Adoption
1 2 3 4 5 Proficiency
1 2 3 4 5 Usage
1 2 3 4 5 Evaluation
1 2 3 4 5 Knowledge
1 2 3 4 5 Arabic Term English Term No.
”” ”””’? Absorptive capacity 1
””” ””’? Abstract of a patent 2
””” ””’? Abstract of bank funds 3
””””””’? Abusive tax shelter 4
”””””’? Acceleration of maturity 5
”””’? Account deactivation 6
””?? (””” ””’?) Cash 7
”?? (””””””) Cash 8
”’? Cashing 9
”””” Credit worthiness appraisal 10
””’? Endorser 11
”””” Clearing agreement 12
”””’? Porterage 13
”” ”’? Oligopoly 14
”’? Annuitant 15
””” Watered stock 16
”””?? Bond amortization 17
”” ””?? Liability for endorsement 18
”” ”” Compensatory balance 19
”””” Gray market 20
”?? Manager 21
”?? Manager 22
”’? Management 23
”’? Administration 24
”” ”””’? Interim financial statements 25
””’? Depreciation 26
””””””?? Adjusted trial balance 27
”””””””?? Non-current liabilities 28
”””””?? Purchase allowances 29
””” ””?? Contra revenue account 30
”””” Consigned goods 31
””””””” Cash receipts controls 32
””””” Bank reconciliation 33
””””’? Supplies expenses 34
””””” Transactions 35
”” Budget 36
””?? Balance sheet 37
”””””?? Labor relations 38
”” ””’? Charts of accounts 39
”” ””’? Capitalized value 40
””””?? Shift premium 41
””””’? Time wages 42
””””” Underwriting 43
”””” ””?? Commercial credit companies 44
”””””?? Functional middlemen 45
””””” Standardization and grading 46
”””’? Partnership 47
”””” Commercial draft 48
”” ””’? Preferred stock 49
”” ””?? Current liabilities 50
Third Section: Your general Attitudes toward the Arabicized business terms.
Please, give your opinion regarding the following statements by putting the appropriate number corresponding to each statement, according to this scale:
( 1) Strongly Disagree (2) Disagree (3) Not Sure (4) Agree (5) Strongly Agree
Estimation Statement No.
My self-confidence increases when using Arabicized business terms. 1
My belonging to Arabic language is the motive to accept Arabicized business terms. 2
I think that The Arabicized business terms are better than the English business terms regarding the transformation of ideas and information. 3
I think that Arabicized business terms facilitate the interactive communication with my colleagues and professors at the department. 4
I think that unifying the Arabicized business terms helps in distributing them in the Arab World. 5
I think that the shorter the syllables are for the Arabicized business terms the more they become distributed. 6
I think that the Arabicized business terms are clear and precise. 7
I think that some of the Arabicized business terms need to be developed and rephrased. 8
My colleagues respect me when using Arabicized business terms. 9
I think that The Arabicized business terms help the Arabic language to cope with the developments in the contemporary life. 10
In my discussions with my friends, I frequently use the Arabicized business terms. 11
I am seeking to distribute and develop the Arabicized business terms. 12
Fourth Section: Open questions
Please, answer the following questions accurately:
13. Why is the Jordan Academy of Arabic lagging far behind in the Arabicization of business terms, not putting them in a separate pamphlet like other scientific terms such as engineering, medical, and agricultural ones, in your point of view?
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
14. What are the procedures you propose for the Jordan Academy of Arabic to be adopted in the Arabicization of business terms?
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
15. Did you understand the questionnaire?
(1) With very low extent (2) With low extent (3) With moderate extent (4) With high extent (5) With very high extent
16. Do you consider your answers as being accurate?
(1) With very low extent (2) With low extent (3) With moderate extent (4) With high extent (5) With very high extent
”””” ””” ”””” ”””””””” ”””””””””” ”””””””
”””””” ” ”””””” ””” ”””””” ”””””””””””””” ””””””””” ” ”” ”””””””” ”” ”””” ””. ”””” ” ””””””””” ””””””””””””” ”””” ””??.
””” ”” ”””””””””””””””””””””” ””??.
”””” ” ””” ”””””””” ””””””??. ” ””””””””””””””””” ” ”””??. ””” ” ””””””””” ””””””” ” ”” ””””” ””””””””””””” ””” ” ”” ”” ””””””””””””””” ”” ”””””””” ” ” ””” ”””””””’?. ” ”””” ” ””””” ”””””” ””””??.
”””””” ”” ”” ”””””””””” ”””””” ””’?. ” ”” ”” ”” ” ””””””” ””””. ” ”” ” ””””””” ”” ”””” ”””” ””??. ” ”””” ”””” ”” ”””” ””” ”””””””””””” ”””’?.
your text in here…

About Essay Sauce

...(download the rest of the essay above)

About this essay:

This essay was submitted to us by a student in order to help you with your studies.

If you use part of this page in your own work, you need to provide a citation, as follows:

Essay Sauce, Arabicized business terms. Available from:<https://www.essaysauce.com/business-essays/essay-arabicized-business-terms/> [Accessed 09-04-20].

Review this essay:

Please note that the above text is only a preview of this essay.

Name
Email
Review Title
Rating
Review Content

Latest reviews: