Arabicization in Saudi Arabia: Procedures and Implementations

Educators and policymakers maintain that Arabicization is of paramount importance. The question, however, is why the Arabicization process has been lagging behind in almost all Arab countries and in Saudi Arabia particularly. This paper attempts to evaluate the planning process of Arabicization based on Haugen‟s language planning model (Haugen, 1983) depicting the success in Arabic as a national language but its regression at an official level. Being the clearest language planning in KSA, it still has some problematic areas in terms of its proper implementation. It incorporates distinct steps; the identification of financial resources, creating time schedules for conclusion, and the evaluation and assessments. This research begins with an introduction to Haugen‟s language planning model (1983) and its basic elements. Moreover, some historical foundations including the objectives of language planning are investigated. Activities of Arabizing language planning are explored as well as the effects of globalization on Arabizing language outlining. The argument here is situated on the exploration of the Saudi language program and supporting legislative records. This paper tackles the questions of implementation in the light of its failures and successes as far as the Saudi policy is concerned.


Introduction
Since English has been regarded as a global language and after the development of open market particularly, its importance on educational and official level is playing a vital role. More specifically for Arabs, the change of language from Arabic to English has not been implemented only for the study of Sciences at a higher level but on the Arts level as well. Implementing on the Arabic as a national language and English as an official and educational language needs to go hand in hand with the rising standards of unending improvements in KSA so that Arabs of all races may easily get a handy access to science and technology available in Arabic as well as English language.
For many Arab researchers, arabicization is deemed to be the most applicable method in constructing and presenting foreign neologisms within Arabic and can justify specific aims. These are preserving the purity of Arabic language and progressing Arabic regarding language and terminology, standardizing the scientific and practical expression to revive the traditional Arabic-Islamic heritage (Ghazala, 2005).
Within this report, "Arabicization" is utilized to specify the process of transliterating an external term as stated by Arabic phonological lingual and morphological guidelines. Due to this, when a specific practical word or phrase is Arabicized, it suggests that it is linguistically borrowed from English and practiced in Arabic with some revision, e.g., "filtration" (faltarah) or without modification, e.g., "filter" (filtar) (Al-Asal & Smadi, 2012).

Review of Literature
This section reviews preliminary definitions of "arabicization", language policy, and language planning.

Arabicization
In this field, many scholars get confused with two English terms which link to al-taCrīb: arabicization and arabization. Whilst some academics use them interchangeably, the former is more fitting as it refers to Arabic whereas the latter connects to the Arab people.
According to Fawwaz Al-Abed Al-Haq (1996), the term "Arabicization" is derived from the word "Arabic" which is the first language of the Arabs. The verb originated from the term Arabicization which means "to Arabicize" and its literal meaning is "to transfer into Arabic." Arabicization has been defined in different ways by well-known linguists, who did so from their own perspectives towards the linguistic matters they were studying. According to Ghunaim (1989, as cited in Al-Abed Al-Haq, 1996, "Arabicization can be defined in three different ways as follows: used as a synonym for the word "translation", and the word "arabized" for "translated". In this context, "Arabization" reflects or/and mirrors the word "foreignization" which means rendering (e.g. culture, science, etc.) from the Arabic language into any other foreign language".
3."Making the Arabic language a language for the entire life of an Arab, the language of thought, feelings, science, and work, with which he/she expresses inner aspirations, heartfelt emotions and glittering ideas; through which he/she learns and teaches. Learning one foreign language or more does not negatively affect the status of the Arabic language; the Arabic language is an instrument for both thinking and expression".
The first definition considers al-taCrīb (i.e. Arabicization) as one of the methods of lexical expansion (Ali, 1987). For many Arab theorists, arabicization is arguably believed to be the most applicable approach in forming and proposing foreign neologisms in Arabic and it can accomplish certain objectives. First, it preserves the authenticity of Arabic and is deemed to be a means of expanding the Arabic vocabulary. Secondly, it standardizes the technical and scientific phrasing and revives the Arabic-Islamic cultural heritage (Ghazala, 2005).
Arabicization, by this interpretation, is the remodeling of non-Arabic language to Arabic by exercising the regulations of the grammatical, phonological and, at times, morphological structures of the language. This is also a crucial factor that has allowed the increasing modernization of Arabic through the assimilation of foreign language (Stetkevych, 1970). Arabicization, according to this definition, is believed to be an adopted strategy for bringing new terms into Arabic, through translating international terminology using Arabic forms. For example, Philosophy is arabicized into falsafah, Drachma into dirham and Asphalt into isfalt.
According to the second definition, Arabicization involves decoding foreign works into Arabic which is not an original phenomenon in the Arab world. It dates back in antiquity from the start of the eighth century to the end of the ninth century. There were two famous schools of translation. The first was in Baghdad whilst the second was established in Muslim Spain where interest in gathering translated works continued unabated. Arabicization aims to reinstitute the Arabic language so that it may adopt its position as the medium of education, administration and cultural activities.
Since the definition of the concept of Arabicization within the Saudi context provides a necessary frame for this study, especially for the readers who are not familiar with this concept, it is the latter definition of Ghunaim that is adopted in this paper. Al-Abed Al-Haq (1996: 41) sees "Arabicization" as a well-organized and well planned process aiming at solving problems facing Arabic language; and it is an institutionalized process undertaken by Arabic language forums in Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Jordan and the Office for the Coordination of Arabicization in Morocco. Al-Sayaadi (1985, as cited by Al-Abed Al-Haq 1996 maintains that Arabicization is not just an exercise in lexical creation; its broader aim is to spread the Arabic language and generalize its use. According to this perspective, psychological and ideological Arabization is given priority over lexical Arabicization. Al-Abed Al-Haq (1996: 41), along the same line of thought, says that "arabizing lexical items is of no use so long as International Journal of Linguistics ISSN 1948-5425 2021 www.macrothink.org/ijl foreign influence dominates the Arabic mentality." Going on with this new concept, arabicization has possessed a comprehensible and expanding recognition not just inside but outside the Arab world as well.

Language Policy
Language planning incorporates the design, implementation and evaluation of a language policy. Language policy is a codified statement highlighting which language will be utilized within a group setting and for what purpose. In general, where this policy exists, two or more languages are in use. Ideally, language policy should be an active and effective process whereby those involved may contribute (Corson, 1999). A group's culture and beliefs must be accounted for when devising appropriate language policies.
A school"s concept of language policy and planning should remain no different, as it is a community of culture and society involving diverse people who bring forth their individual cultures, beliefs and perceptions. "[I]nformation about the school and the community is needed" (Wiley, 1996, p.139) before policies can be materialized and implemented.
For the purposes of this research, the definition expressed in the previous paragraph for language policy will be utilized. All language policy requires planning; Fishman (2006) points out that a language policy goes hand in hand with language planning, unless the guidelines are already implied in a group or community.

Language Planning
"Language planning is generally seen as entailing the formation and implementation of a policy designed to prescribe, or influence the language(s) and varieties of language that will be used and the purposes for which they will be used" (Wiley, 1996, p. 108).
Language planning is a social creation involving the discursive production of a language policy (Kaplan and Baldauf, 1997). The phrase language planning was first used by Haugen (1959) within his introduction of a fourfold planning model. In this model, he explains how the stages of language planning incorporated a selection of the norm, codification, implementation, and elaboration. According to Antia (2000, p. 1) Haugen"s theory of language development includes four dimensions which in turn create a two-by-two matrix. Language is regarded in terms of norm and function, and the article of the planning is viewed in terms of language and society.
A categorized difference between status-planning and corpus planning, however, was first made by Kloss (1969). This compartmentalization conveys how a specific language or variety may be chosen for certain purposes and given formal status. Arguably, this can form a language policy which is a product of language planning and may be understood within the discourse of language politics and society or the more informal, but substantial, political and social aspects of language planning (Kaplan and Baldauf, 1997, p. xiii). One can then voice that issues arising from language status planning are due to political issues, as the focal point of status planning is on judicial resolutions that impact the reallocation of language functions (Cobarrubies and Fishman, 1983, p.13).
On the contrary, corpus planning brings attention to the changes caused by deliberate planning to the anatomy of a language. Regarding Haugen"s model, a norm is selected, and then codified through orthography, grammar and lexica (Antia, 2000, p.1). Whilst status planning predominantly addresses the choosing of a norm, corpus planning manages the codification, thus playing a vital aspect of implementation and elaboration stages. Elaboration can be observed as a language task developing in the sophistication of the chosen code (Antia, 2000, p.1). Since corpus planning distinctly focuses on the development of the body of languages, arrangements relating to scientific and technological terminology links to the corpus of the language (Cobarrubies and Fishman, 1983, p.13). Although both planning types encompass different characteristics, the relationship between both processes could be considered dichotomous. Arguably so, status planning and corpus planning are usually complementary (Clyne, 1997, p.1), as there is an aspect of inseparability between them.

Arabicization and Corpus Planning
Language planning has principally been assorted on the basis of its main target point. Subsequently, two types of language planning have been identified in Arabicization; status planning and corpus planning. Antia (2000, p.15) dictates that language development relies largely on its planning. Corpus development of languages is a key step to enable practical experience in the implementation process, regardless of the policy elevating the status of languages. The type of language planning relevant in the Arabicization case can best be viewed as a clear experience of corpus planning. It uses planning procedures to aid the codifying and elaboration of Arabic linguistic forms. The Arabicization corpus planning process focuses on two aspects of corpus planning: codification and elaboration to cope with new fields of use, most obviously through the process of terminological modernization and expansion (Kaplan & Baldauf 1997: 38-49).
Due to linguistic differences among languages, rendering new concepts embodied in new terms has always been a challenging issue in translation. Because of the foreignness and unfamiliarity of English terms in Arabic, the Arabic Language Academy of Cairo [majma" al-lughati al-arabiyah] has endeavored to coin native terms in order to domesticate and naturalize foreign terminology into Arabic. To accomplish this goal, translation strategies, as well as Arabic word-formation techniques such as derivation and composition have been employed by the academy. Among Arabicization methods is outright phonetic borrowing of the English term via transliteration into Arabic sounds and characters. Arabicization methods included outright phonetic borrowing, loan translation, derivation, and composition. Findings suggested that Cairo ALA has appropriately applied methods of translation, as well as techniques of Arabicization in its efforts to delimit the foreignness of English terms. Accordingly, these terms were properly domesticated into Arabic (Awang & Salman, 2017).

Lexical Codification and Elaboration
Al-Abed Al-Haq (1996) was able to come up with different definitions of Arabicization. Mohammad Sayadi (as cited in Al-Abed Al-Haq, 1996), for example, was able to come up with this definition which brings Arabicization as a process of corpus planning: Arabic Language academies (ALAs) established in Damascus in 1919, in Cairo in 1932, in Baghdad in 1947, in Rabat in 1960 in Amman in 1976, adopted the process of Arabicization to establish or alter terminology, including both technical and scientific terms, being utilized in the Arab world (Al-Asal & Smadi, 2012). Such Arabicized words were initially abstracted from a variety of languages such as, but not limited to: Latin, Greek, English, and French. Whilst obtaining this target in mind, ALAs have handled the responsibility of constructing and publishing leaflets based on neologisms from standard Arabic, to replace terms that have been borrowed from English or other languages.
However, Arabicization is analyzed from many different perspectives: Anti-Arabicization scholars claim that Arabicization seeks to dilute the language with foreign terms. On the other hand, pro-Arabicization theorists argue that this enriches the language allowing Arabic to repossess its established role in modern society. This position can be obtained by justifying Standard Arabic as a channel of instruction and study in higher organizations.
Many traditional and modern Arab linguistics, lexicographers, planners and translators, have successfully utilized a range of techniques to compose and embellish the Arabic vocabulary. They have done so with a vision to handle its development in scientific research.

Language Policy and Status Language Planning in Saudi Arabia
Phillipson and Skutnabb-Kangas (1996:15) define language policy as "decisions on rights and access to languages and on the roles and functions on particular languages and varieties of language in a given policy". In language planning, a dichotomy has been frequently made between overt and covert language policy. A language policy is overt when it is stated, explicit and made public; i.e. "embodiment of rules in laws or constitution", whereas the covert policy is not formally stated (Schiffman, 1996: 45). In Saudi Arabia, the language policy is overt and Arabic is its official language as stated in the first article of the basic system of the government: "the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is a sovereign Arab Islamic state with Islam as its religion; Allah's Book and the Sunnah of his prophet, Allah"s peace and blessings be upon him, are its constitution, Arabic is its language and Riyadh is its capital".
The language policy can be traced in five articles issued by the Cabinet of Ministers under the policy of education in Saudi Arabia (Al-Shammary, 2009).
Article 24: The basic principle is that all courses in all educational levels should be taught in Arabic. Another language can be used if deemed necessary. ISSN 1948-5425 2021 www.macrothink.org/ijl 66 Article 46: Improving the linguistic ability in all the possible ways that enrich the Arabic language and help to feel and appreciate the aesthetic dimensions in both of its style and content.

International Journal of Linguistics
Article 50: Supplying students with the understanding of a second language in addition to their home language. This will enable learners to obtain knowledge of sciences, arts and inventions, which they can communicate to other societies, thus giving them the ability to add to the development of Islam and to the service of mankind.
Article 114: Translation of science and useful knowledge and enriching the Arabic language with the terms needed for Arabization to make knowledge accessible to the largest possible number of citizens.
Article 140: Establishing translation centers to follow the development of the scientific researches in all fields and translate them to achieve Arabization of higher education.
The usefulness of incorporating Arabic language, as a form of instruction, at colleges of medicine and engineering became the main topic of much research during the 1980"s and 1990"s (Al-Jarf, 2008). A number of survey studies has been conducted on the attitudes of Saudi and Arab university students and teachers with respect of using Arabic or/and English as a medium of instruction in science education. Another study by Al-Muhandis and Bakri (1988) showed that 66% of students prefer using Arabic besides English in giving lectures; 57% prefer using Arabic in textbooks; 53% prefer Arabic in writing research projects; and 39% prefer Arabic in exam taking. On the other hand, 22% prefer using English in giving lectures; 32% in textbooks; 33% in writing research projects; and 44% in exam taking.
In a similar study, Al-Muhaidib (1998) investigated the attitudes towards Arabizing engineering education at King Saud University, surveying 77 teachers and 300 students at the Faculty of Engineering. The study revealed that 75% of teachers and 73.7% of students favor the use of Arabic as a medium of instruction in engineering education. 49.4% of teachers and 62.7% of students believe that teaching engineering in Arabic is possible in the present time.
The results also showed that 8% of the department and 22% of the learners determined that Arabic engineering textbooks were abundantly accessible. Approximately 5% of the faculty and 13% of the students expressed how it would be more effective to gradually substitute to Arabic as a vehicle of instruction. 48% of the faculty opted to switch to Arabic as a medium of instruction, when more Arabic engineering textbooks and references were available. Furthermore, 20% of the faculty and 11% of the learners sought to change to Arabic after the department became competent in teaching Arabic.
Some researchers investigated the availability of Arabic publications in medicine, engineering and technology. Abu-Arafah and Hassein (1998) noted that 25% of the faculty at the Departments of the Production Technology and Industrial Electronics at the College of Technology in Riyadh, had publications in their respected fields in Arabic. 70% of the faculty and 71% of the students concluded that Arabic references in Production Technology and Industrial Electronics were sufficient. On the other hand, many Saudi students feel that Arabic is not the language of science. In Al-Jarf"s study (2004), the results showed that 96% International Journal of Linguistics ISSN 1948-5425 2021 www.macrothink.org/ijl of the students at Jordan University and 82% of the subjects at King Saud University stated that Arabic could be used as a medium of instruction in religion, history, Arabic literature and education. English, according to these students, was more appropriate for teaching medicine, pharmacy, engineering, science, nursing, and computer science.
The studies discussed, depict the status of the Arabic language in Saudi Arabia, consisting of the importance given to a language by a group, society or nation. Status planning refers to "the ways in which societies recognize, accept, and sanction the use of languages in their communities and institutions" (Herriman &. Bumaby, 1996, p. 5). In Hornberger's (2006) unifying framework, policy-planning aims for status planning are standardization, officialization, nationalization and proscription. The cultivation planning goals for status planning are: language revival, language maintenance, language spread and inter-lingual communication (Hornberger, 2006). The target of status planning is to increase the uses of a language, thus broadening its value. For example, to expand the uses of a language facing extinction, such as Hebrew at the end of the 19 th century, language rejuvenation can arguably be the fitting approach for the cultivation-planning goal of status planning.
"Arabic language is one of the most important and prominent pillars of Arab culture and the education ministry is taking keen interest to celebrate it" (Al Al-Sheikh, 2020).
These quoted words were said by the education minister in Saudi Arabia, who also said that "the language is a fundamental pillar of national identity, and cultural and civilization diversity in the Kingdom". The education minister, Dr. Al Al-Sheikh, made these remarks on the occasion of the World Arabic Language Day while noting the efforts made by educational institutions to serve all aspects of the language, define and preserve them, take pride in their values, and inculcate them in the hearts of students. The education minister added that the Arabic language has a remarkable presence on the international scene with its cultural, intellectual, economic, political, and communication manifestations. It is one of the six official languages approved by the United Nations, and one of its working languages. Al-Sheikh noted that the status of the Arabic language emanates from two main dimensions: the first is the language of the Ever-Glorious Qur"an. In addition, it serves as a link among people who speak it. "The Saudi government is keen on doing everything that would contribute to the spread of the Arabic language, enhance its global presence, and support international programs and projects that promote it" (Al Al-Sheikh, 2020).

Research Questions
This paper attempts to answer the following questions: (1) What is the language planning situation in Saudi Arabia (status and corpus)? (2) What are the reasons behind the ineffectiveness of the Arabicization process in almost all Arab countries and, particularly, in Saudi Arabia?, and (3) How Haugen"s language planning model (Haugen, 1983) could be helpful in this regard?

Problems and Solutions
Among the most problematic issues in investigating Arabicization as a language planning are the threats for Arabization, the dangers behind Arabicization"s improvements and the lack of International Journal of Linguistics ISSN 1948-5425 2021 www.macrothink.org/ijl efforts" coordination, but countless lexical items were created by un-unified individuals, whose creations nevertheless have since become a part of the Arabic lexicon. Moreover, although of the efforts of "The Center of Coordination" in Rabat, unfortunately there is no unified plan to implement Arabicization policy. The lack of coordination among Arab neologizers and academics in general and the internal efforts of the Saudi universities (i.e. King Saud University and King Abdulaziz University) has led the abundance of synonymous terms.
This study aims to fill the gap in the literature and contribute to the ongoing discussion with regards to arabicization by examining the case in Saudi Arabia and suggesting practical procedures.

Lack of Standardization
The issue of terminology is compounded in Arabic because of the absence of standardization which arises from the contrasting assortments of classical, modern standard, and vernacular Arabic. This mixture has confused the phonological connection between foreign terms and its Arabic counterpart, in newly composed Arabic vocabulary. Due to this, the semantic connection becomes disoriented as the relationship between the foreign terms, to which Arabic speakers are previously exposed to, and the newly-coined equivalent is not visible.
Searching for equivalents in Arabic for technical English terms creates problems as both languages carry a unique nature of characteristics. Such problems are arguably embodied in the endless advancement of science and technology as well as the impact of mass media on individuals who collect advanced concepts and innovations.
The majority of Arab linguists view these approaches as inalterable, as though exempt from any adaptations. Arguably so, such a belief is dictatorial as language is both a crest of culture and heritage, as well as a crucial aspect of society which evolves in the way that people or nations themselves do [9]. The 21st Century, like the Arabic academies, is tasked with investigating the analytical basis of the classical attitude to this problem. This is to be accomplished by renovating the immovable rules, which will grant Arabic with flexibility to develop into a language that is both functional and practical.

The Threat of the Debate
Article (11) of the law of higher education (1999:7) says that Arabic is the language of education and that the use of a foreign language is only an exception to this rule; "Arabic language is the language of instruction at universities. Another language can be used if necessary; however; this should be made by a decision from the concerned university's council". The irony here is that this exception has become a norm in many Saudi colleges and universities. A closer look at the medium of instruction in higher education institutions in Saudi Arabia reveals that English has gained the status of official medium of instruction in science colleges such as medicine, engineering, computer sciences, physics, chemistry, mathematics, geology, business, etc. Arabic is utilised to instill knowledge in students of Islamic studies, history, geography amongst other courses in education (Troudi, 2002). Data from a preliminary research study conducted at King Saud University with a sample of International Journal of Linguistics ISSN 1948-5425 2021 www.macrothink.org/ijl students at the colleges of medicine, pharmacy, science, and computer science, concluded that English is the language of classroom instruction and of many textbooks in most programmes (Al-Jarf, 2005).
The rationale behind using English as the medium of instruction in these colleges and universities is the desire to take advantage of global opportunities (accessing up-to-date knowledge through online and offline sources, communicating and collaborating with their counterparts all over the world, etc.). (2015) proposes a study which aims to reveal the experiments of Arabicization done in the Arab World The study indicates that the cooperation between scientific institutions is essential in the Arab world to make Arabic language is the official language of education. Naisbitt and Aburdene (1990) established that over 80% of information stored in computers, worldwide, is in English. Over half of technical and scientific periodicals published globally are also in English. This depicts how English is a supreme language of modern telecommunication technologies, electronics, medicine and space technology. Language allows people to communicate with one another, and English is a powerful language shared by a vast majority of people. This appoints the English language as being essential, particularly for those who require access to stored information. According to a study in Washington prepared by the Federal Coordinating Committee on Science, Engineering and Technology, 50% of the scientific books are published in English while Arabic is covering a very small space of the remaining 50%. This means that Arabs who are not fluent in English will be deprived of more than half of the references in the field of science and technology. Moreover, Arabs who do not know English will be away from participating in international research project (Al-Jarf, 2004).

Al-Ajrami
Besides the advantages promised earlier, there is an agreement among educators who oppose using English as the medium of instruction since it, as they think, has many negative effects on the quality of teaching. It is argued that a human being is more able to think and express one"s self in the native language than in a foreign one. Creativity does not occur without thorough understanding of information, which can only be achieved by means of thinking in the mother tongue to which one has been accustomed since childhood. It is also believed that using Arabic as the language of instruction facilitates learning sciences. Using a native language is psychologically beneficial as it serves as a pedagogical tool for supplying access to disciplinary content, creating effective communication, and supporting prior knowledge (Auerbach, 1993).
One can argue that it is a human right to be able to access knowledge in one"s native language. Giving students this right and allowing them to use their native language can expand their passion for learning as it will minimize language and culture shock. In turn, this enables them to focus on their chosen route of study. Since "relations of power and their affective consequences are integral to language acquisition", student learning can be embellished by blending their home language with their academic studies, thereby providing their first language with a position more equal to that of English (Auerbach, 1993:34).

The Threat of Globalization
Language planning is a contemporary matter. Every dominant nation desires to sustain its national discourse as the favored mode of communication. Yet, globalization and the dominion of the English language has influenced governments to re-examine their language planning policies with an angle which enhances the distinction of their dominant language, worldwide. Arabic-speaking countries historically dominated the medieval scientific arena, yet are now struggling to prevent the Arabic language from becoming overwhelmed by modernized foreign terminology. The Arabic language-planning agencies that, regardless of their accomplished intentions, have been unable to display successful advancements, must carefully analyze the progress of other planning associations which have reached their set targets. Attempts by linguistically and ethnically diverse Arab countries, to advocate for technical and scientific terminology, merit close reviewing by Arab nations, who should also acclimate their growing achievements to the issues with Arabic language planning.

Results and Discussion
Arabicization is mandatory for maintaining the purity of Arabic. It is widely believed among Saudis that preserving the purity of Arabic, the language of the Holy Qur"an, is a religious duty. Kaplan and Baldauf (1997:11) state that "Islamic religious bodies have played a central role in the spread of Arabic and in the preservation of Classical Arabic, as they believe the word of Allah should be read and spoken in the language in which it was given to the Prophet".
In general, Arabization aims to maintain Arabic as the language of education, work and media throughout the Arab word. The core objective of the issue is "to replace foreign terms with Arabic-derived words for the purpose of reducing the impact of foreign terms on the Arabic lexicon" (Al-Qahtani, 2000: 1). According to Thomas (1991), such a sociolinguistic procedure provides "a legitimate role for purification among the objectives of planned language intervention" (P.7). Al-Qahtani (2000:2) convincingly argues that Arabicization is a national concern in Saudi Arabia. In this sense, "Arabicization can be defined on a language ideology basis, as it involves a great sense of nationalism as well as linguistic purism" (ibid: p 47). Furthermore, some linguists, educationalists and analysts (e.g. Al-Abed Al-Haq 1996, Al-Shammary, 1998) see an economic aspect to Arabization as is the case in all nativization processes.
There is a general consensus among educators (cf. Homeidi 1998) that a human being is more able to think and express one"s self in the native language than in a foreign language. Creativity does not occur without thorough understanding of information which can only be achieved by means of thinking in the mother tongue to which one has been accustomed since childhood. It is also believed that using Arabic as the language of instruction facilitates learning sciences. It can also be said that among the basic human rights is having access to knowledge in one"s own native language.

Recommendations
Regarding recommendations, many researchers have stated how there are specific approaches to be pursued which will allow an effective application of the language policy. It can be argued that languages are preserved accordingly through corpus planning. This is supported by  who state that languages of European origin became more developed due to an active focal point on corpus planning. As a result, such languages become a means for broadcasting specialized information and knowledge: "crucial to the pursuit of goals on the global agenda, for example, the environment, international public health, empowerment, democratization and good governance, etc." (Antia, 2000, p. xxi). English is now viewed as procuring a dominant status, even with a policy that elevates the position of Arabic in South Africa. Allwood, Grönqvist and Hendrikse (2003) comment on socio-economic pressures, the need for international communication standards and stable geo-political relations as the factors which assist the death of a language and a deviation towards monolingualism. They also advise that "although the greatest potential for the survival of a language would be when it can function at all levels in society; this would be an unrealistic immediate expectation with regard to all languages spoken in South Africa" (Allwood, Grönqvist and Hendrikse, 2003, p. 191). Nonetheless, the theorists recognize that languages are able to co-exist without facing extinction within a multilingual setting. This is indeed achievable when each language, linguistically obtains its individual and valued space.
It is also recommended to make use of other languages to spread Arabic Language and devote it for the purpose of scientific revival in order to make Arabicization as an effective power that activates the creative memory of researchers (Al-Ajrami, 2015, p. 1992. The incorporation of the language policy rests upon the improvement of teaching materials. As the policy is status-driven, there is a requirement to concentrate on corpus as this stimulates a language"s status. Corpus planning comprises administering terminologies to cater for socio-economic development. It further includes evolving new vocabulary and discourse which will aid in the advancement of teaching materials. Continuing to develop corpus resources may expedite the functioning of otherwise deprived languages in most or all socio-economic realms in South Africa (Ibid.).
Another crucial approach is to inspire people to utilise their languages in all settings. The availability of learning material in all official languages in South Africa creates a foundation for a development and motivation to do so. The orderly advancement of these languages needs to be pursued until people accept their languages as commonly used. This is fundamental to information access and diffusion which is imperative to the functioning of modern societies (Kaplan and Baldauf, 1997, p. 48).
The final strategy links to how language specialists should take advantage of technological initiatives to develop and preserve every language in Saudi Arabia. Computers can play a critical role in corpus planning, particularly in improvement of dictionaries and localizing content. They are also able to store a broad amount of speech-based and text-based information for additional research in languages. The research focused on corpus development should be encouraged, as it will aid in creating assessment and training material for schools and speech therapy. This will further elevate the level of literacy in African languages of South Africa. This coincides with the ideology of language management with its inclination to apply data from the way individuals cope with communication challenges as the basis for community-wide actions (Antia, 2000, p. 8). Corpus planning is also supported by the alternative model, as it promises to bring specific individuals and organizations to participate.

Conclusion
This article has displayed that although the status language policy in Saudi Arabia could be considered successful, questions about its implementation still arise. The thrust of policy within its explicit statements has been effective towards maintenance rather than restoration. Disappointingly, the planning of this policy shifted meanwhile to talking revival rather than survival. The dialogue used in the policy echoes contradictory ideologies arising from the history of this country and highlights the politics that formed a democratic state in South Africa. Ethnicity and group demands have had a compelling role in language discussions which formulated the current language policy. In this article, however, theorists have argued that status planning should be integrated with corpus planning to develop languages correctly. There is a need to shift focus from status planning and its political debates to concrete corpus planning. This conveys the need to move from idealism to a pragmatic stance of language planning. Through this, language specialists will be actively engaging with the space or climate of development caused by status language planning. This will ensure corpus building is not neglected. Corpus planning will mark a need for localization or glocalization and consign creation as a solution to a challenge of global technology and modernization (Antia, 2000). It is based on this that Antia (2000, p. xxi) focuses on details of how to create specialized discourses for functional (as opposed to mere symbolic or demonstration) purposes. Creating language-teaching resources is a crucial step in corpus planning, language development, and policy implementation.