The diffusion in recent years of new means of communication such as social networks and satellite television has contributed to a dramatic increase in the amount of linguistic variation in Arabic. This seems to confirm the predictions of those Western and Arab sociolinguists who argued for an end of diglossia and theorized the existence of a multiglossic system which accounts for variation in Arabic and for the existence and necessity of unifying varieties, such as Educated Spoken Arabic and Formal Spoken Arabic. Building on the two parallel theses of Suleiman’s (2011) concept of "nativist dualism" and the conception of diglossia as the presence of two models of reference in the mind of the Arabic speaker, composed of metalinguistic and linguistic components (Giolfo&Sinatora, September 2011), this paper argues that the increased amount of codeswitching and codemixing in the media should be rather considered as an enrichment deriving from a diglossic system. The media data analyzed in this paper includes excerpts from five political talk shows broadcast on Aljazeera.net between December 2007 and January 2012 and Facebook posts from the Egyptian page "kulluna Khaled Sa‘?d" and the Syrian one "Al-d?mar?" collected between November 2011 and January 2012 (work in progress). While the former belong to a spoken domain, the latter are part of a written domain. A study of the pragmatic tools utilized in this data, with a particular focus on the use of genitive and possessive constructions, shows continuity with the pragmatic-syntactic features of spoken Arabic illustrated by Brustad (2000). It is argued that such continuity confirms the presence of a cognitive distinction which regulates the use of fuSHa forms for written purposes and ‘ammiyya forms for spoken ones. Despite the written form of the posts, the perceived volatility of Facebook communication resembles typical characteristics of the spoken, rather than the written channel. Moreover, it is argued the high amount of codeswitching and codemixing is a predictable phenomenon which arises from the fact that the contexts analyzed are highly ideologicized domains, characterized by indexical and ideological communication. Despite the impact of Western media formats and globalization, linguistic variation seems to draw from a diglossic system which is peculiar to a shared Arab heritage and identity.

In Lebanon, the public political discourse is dominated not by print media, but by political talk shows aired live on TV. In fact, the Lebanese audience has a number of programs to choose from and follows them on a regular basis. On November 14, 2011, the episode of the program bi-Mawd?uu?iiya (‘with objectivity’) on the Lebanese TV channel MTV featured two Lebanese politicians – Fayez Cheker, the regional secretary of the Baath Party in Lebanon, and Mustafa Aloush, member of the political Bureau of the Future Movement. That week’s show, hosted by Waleed Abboud, had the conflict in Syria, which had been ongoing for almost nine months at that point, as well as its consequences for Lebanon as its topic. What started as a moderated political talk show, soon turned into a heated discussion between the two invitees that lead to personal insults and even the use of force, before the broadcasting was interrupted. It even gained attention in the media across the globe. Clearly, something must have gone wrong. The aim of this paper is to show that this escalation is not only due, as one might be inclined to assume, to the opposing political standpoints of the two participants – Cheker, as head of the Baath Party in Lebanon obviously pro-Assad, and Aloush, member of the Future Movement, and thus the March 14 bloc, anti-Assad – but rather a consequence of their choices in discourse strategies as well as their individual non-matching conversational styles. Following the methodology of Discourse Analysis, in particular Interactional Sociolinguistics, I will not only identify, compare and contrast their conversational styles (i.e. high-involvement vs. high-considerateness), but also analyze their choices in a number of discourse strategies – such as code and register, conversational code-switching, use of pronouns, address terms, framing, floor taking, prosody, etc. – as well as the impact of these choices – whether conscious or not – on the flow of conversation.

This paper is centered upon a discourse analysis of the rhetoric of King Muhammad VI of Morocco as regards human rights, minorities, and particularly Amazigh (Berber) issues. Questions of context, audience, and stance (eg Jaffe 2007, 2009) are considered in framing the way these topics are discussed in royal discourse. Both 9/11 and the "Arab Spring" emerge as watershed moments signaling an increased focus on multiculturalism, tolerance, and coexistence; the paper charts the gradual development of a particular articulation (unique to the Moroccan regime) of these values over time. Questions of translation, ie, how abstract principles such as human rights move into various political discourses, are also taken into consideration. The text of the king's speeches can be understood as in dialogue with emerging international human rights legal discourses as well as international media trends surrounding Islam in the post 9/11 era.