Talk:Kuwaiti Arabic

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 August 2019 and 11 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Emascandam.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 01:56, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Regarding the divisions in the Kuwaiti society

Dear @37.36.109.199 and 37.36.65.212: (same person), the source divides people to three main groups, although Hasawis and Utub are both Arabs, because it talks about **linguistic** division, not ancestral ones. This article is concerned with the linguistic divides and that's why the Kuwaiti society is usually divided into these three groups in the linguistic literature, since despite the fact that the first two groups are both Arabs they have their distinct characteristics in their speech, and the specific area each group emigrated from plays a factor in that. In addition to that, you can't simply ignore what the citations say and add your own text. Texts and information are added according to citations, not the other way around.

Furthermore, how do you claim you didn't change anything when your edits added and removed information, such as adding the "to a lesser extent" part?

I will leave your edits for now. However, if you refuse to discuss your changes I'll ask for the page to be protected. Also. I am kindly asking you to watch what you say. Bad-mouthing won't be tolerated for too long. --KoveytBud (talk) 12:38, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

"Lingustic divisions"? That doesn't even make any sense. Baharna are lingusitically distinct from the Hasawis and Iraqis, they are not linguistically the same. This is a fact. It is well known that the Baharna have a distinct dialect. Kuwaitis of Iraqi ancestry tend to be very diverse in terms of ethnic origin, some of them are Persians/Ajam while others are Southern Iraqi Arabs of tribal origin, Sunni Iraqi Arabs and even Kurds. Each group had its own dialect and accent. They are not the same (linguistically speaking). It is very misleading to claim that Kuwait is divided into 3 groups in terms of linguistic divisions. That is simply untrue and inaccurate. Pre-oil Kuwait had far more linguistic divisions. The source doesn't make any logical sense. Many sources are inaccurate because the authors have their own agendas (political agendas, sectarian agendas, and so on). You can't believe everything you read. Just because it's a thesis doesn't mean it's not heavily biased and influenced by personal agendas. Not to mention the fact the source ignores the existence of Sunni Kuwaitis of African ancestry, who are linguistically distinct from other Kuwaitis. There are more than 3 groups and corresponding linguistic divisions.

"specific area each group emigrated from plays a factor in that." Have you ever visited Iraq? Bahrain? Al-Hasa? Modern linguists identify Iraq as being distinct from the Arabian Gulf countries. Bahrain is also widely considered distinct from Al-Hasa. Hasawis are of predominantly tribal Najdi origin. Their dialect is mostly Najdi. Baharna are not of Najdi origin. The Baharna dialect and accent is considered distinct from the Najdi Gulf Arabic dialect. In fact, the Baharna dialect is considered more similar to Iraq than it is to the Gulf Arabic dialect. You need to accept that not ALL sources are 100% reliable and accurate. Humans make mistakes. They can be influenced by their own agendas. I highly recommend that you speak to the Kuwaitis of Bahraini ancestry and ask them about their dialect. There is simply no comparison. Everyone knows that the Baharna are linguistically distinct from the Hasawis. The Kuwaitis of Iraqi ancestry are too diverse to make a final judgment however the Iraqi Arabic dialect is not even considered a Gulf Arabic dialect! The modern scholarly consensus is that even the Southern Iraqi dialect is linguistically distinct from Gulf Arabic.----- 37.36.109.199 (talk) 20:18, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. I do understand your point and while some of your points certainly are true, for example, Baharna certainly do have a different dialect than Hasawis, we still can't make these changes for the following reasons:

First, I don't know why exactly did the author divide the Kuwaiti society to three groups; I can only make guesses. Could it be because the Hasawis and Baharnas and other groups' tongues assimilated into one later on during the history of Kuwait? This is possible. Could it be because their dialects are different but not as drastically different as the Utubs? I honestly don't know. There is no point in discussing this (although I myself would be interested in doing so). Please note that she is not the only author that makes such claim; I have seen this three-way divide in many other materials. Since the three-way divide comes from accepted source (Phd Thesis from a reputable university) and from an expert in the field (a doctor in Linguistics), we can assume she made a mistake, and it could be that she might have really did. However, since these suspicions are unsources or based on original research, we can not simply change the text to whatever we like without sources just because we believe it is untrue. Sources are needed to support claims; especially ones that are for some reason controversial like this one, and even if reliable sources are found that contradicts existing sources, both of the statements should be included in the article because they both come from reliable sources. Best. --KoveytBud (talk) 03:56, 16 April 2017 (UTC

Dear @37.36.109.199: in case you have nothing else to add, I'll be reverting your edits. --KoveytBud (talk) 02:23, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Since you haven't replied for 2 days, I'll go ahead and revert your edits. If you want to make any further controversial changes you'll need to discuss them first. Regards --KoveytBud (talk) 01:12, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

I didn't reply because I was busy! You are just trolling at this stage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.203.79.241 (talk) 03:07, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

@31.203.79.241: you didn't add anything to the discussion. If you don't have sources, you can't change sourced texts just because you don't like it or think it's not true. Wikipedia is written with sources, not what people think should be included and what shouldn't. I won't allow you to remove sourced material just because you think the author is wrong. --KoveytBud (talk) 15:48, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Kuwait

Magandan Umaga po Rochelleasaytona (talk) 02:41, 30 October 2021 (UTC)