Contrastive Rhetoric Between Arabic and English Languages Any writer is going to have difficulty when they try to convey a thought in a new language. Sometimes it is difficult even between dialects with the same base language. The problems that occur to a person while writing in a second language due to language and cultural differences is termed contrastive rhetoric. One author states that "contrastive rhetoric maintains that language and writing are cultural phenomena" (Connor 5). If two cultures vary greatly then it would make sense that writers who try to cross that cultural and language barrier would have a more daunting task than normal. In the case of Arabic and English native speakers trying to write in the others language, there are many different conventions in the two languages that make the rhetoric very contrastive. Because the cultures are very distinct from one another and due to the vast structural differences within both the spoken and written languages, writers will face specific challenges making themselves understood to natives of the opposite culture.

The basic premise of contrastive rhetoric studies is to determine both why there are differences and to try and reach a conclusion as to how those differences can be mitigated. "The basic premise of…Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis is that language learning can be more successful when the two languages -- the native and the foreign -- are similar. Some linguists call this situation "positive transfer" "(Al-Sibai). This idea of positive transfer happens between languages in which the base is similar such as German and English or Spanish and French, but it does not hold for the Semitic languages and the Romantic languages or the Germanic ones. Basic sentence structure...

Asian languages, being of a tonal quality and the written alphabets having many more components are also hard to transfer. Connor (2002) said that "ESL teachers often comment that ESL students use patterns of language and stylistic conventions that they have learned in their native languages and cultures" (4). These patterns can add confusion to what they are trying to write. One of Connor's students, who is Chinese, said that she could think of beautiful flowing phrases to use from her native language that did not translate well into English. Thus, when she wrote she was not able to convey the feelings she wanted to.
The same thing happens when people who are native Arabic speakers try to write in English and express themselves clearly. The first problem that many non-native speakers have is that they think in their native language and this causes problems in conversion (Connor 3). The need is for the writer to think in the language they are writing in, but it is a difficult skill to master that often takes decades (Connor). Another issue that Eastern writers have is that instructors have thought, at least in the past, that there is an inherent superiority of Western languages over Eastern (Connor). Although this is not the case (no language in and of itself can be either superior or inferior), it has clouded the way that English language teachers have regarded the writings of Arabic speakers. Arabic scholars have been "critical of previous contrastive rhetorical research of Arabic, which is "characterized by a general vagueness of thought which stems from overemphasis on the symbol at the expense of the meaning," or as analyzing "Arabic writers as confused, coming to the same point two or three times from different angles, and so on" (Connor). This lack of acceptance for Arabic-style writing among Western scholars has changed over time though as native English speakers have come to appreciate the diversity of language.

Some specific differences occur when writers switch between the two languages. The structure of a sentence can contain "more than one place to accommodate the adverbial concerned in the sentence. In view of this sort of positional freedom, teachers are able to predict that Arabs, for example, will not have much difficulty with adverbials (Al-Sibai). However, this is…