Readings in Language Shift Studies from the Past to the Present: Review Article

Based on the fact that our social and national identities are usually communicated and interpreted through language (Abdelhadi (2017), Sacic (2018)), and the scholarly belief that a shift in one’s language, from his/her mother tongue to a more dominant language, can contribute to an unintentional cultural merge or loss of original identity (Fishman (1991), Nowak (2020)), the current paper aims to shed light on the research concerned with the language shift (LS) phenomenon, with more focus on the historical development of the concept, the factors affecting it, the domains and stages of LS, and types of LS research. The paper also reviews some relevant concepts to LS, such as the relationship between language and identity, and the theory of ethno-linguistic vitality (EV) and language attitudes. In addition, a review of recent studies on LS in general, i.e. internationally, and in the Arab world more specifically is also provided.


Introduction
The following section reviews the literature relevant to Language Shift (LS) studies, with more focus on the definition of LS, the historical development of the concept, the factors affecting it, the domains and stages of LS, and types of LS research. It goes on to consider associated concepts, such as the relationship between language and identity, and the theory of ethno-linguistic vitality (EV) and language attitudes. In addition, a review of studies on LS in the Arab world in general, and in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in particular, is provided.
In addition, sociolinguists examining language shift and language maintenance have recurrently addressed this relationship between language and culture, as they stress that language and culture are 'inextricably interlinked' (Rajeshwarivejay, 2020). Fishman (1991: 72), for example, argues that when a speech community loses its language, it also loses the culture embedded in it. He states that: Take it away from the culture, and you take away its greetings, its curses, its praises, its laws, its literature, its songs, its riddles, its proverbs, its cures, its wisdom, its prayers. The culture could not be expressed and handed on in any other way. What would be left? When you are talking about the language, most of what you are talking about is the culture. That is, you are losing all those things that essentially are the way of life, the way of thought, the way of valuing, and the human reality that you are talking about.
The second school of thought considers that the major role assigned to language in constructing group and individual identities is 'exaggerated' (Bichani, 2015). This school argues that many groups have maintained their identity even though a language shift has occurred (Canagarajah, 2008;Lane, 2009;Liebkind, 1999). For example, Myers-Scotton (2006), argues that language is not the most important feature in defining identities, especially when compared to factors such as religion or territory. According to Somlicz (1979), the Irish, managed to preserve their identity despite shifting their language to English, because, he explains, the Irish cultural values were expressed more through Catholicism than through language.
The third school of thought argues that there exists a degree of 'inter-dependence' between identity and language. In other words, a group's language affects the 'construction' of its identity, and the group's identity 'impacts' the language attitudes and choices of the group (Liebkind, 1999:144). In agreement, Jupp et al. (1982) asserted that there is a 'mutual' relationship between language and identity. They maintain that certain styles of using language help to 'construct' and 'reveal' the speaker's social identity. Similarly, Bichani (2015) affirms that personal, social or ethnic identity can influence the speaker's way of communicating in various contexts.
Overall, the previous studies give us a glimpse at the huge role language plays in shaping one's identity, most importantly his/her national identity, and the feeling of pride as belonging to a specific group. Indeed, LS can pose a threat to one's mother tongue, and consequently his/her sense of identity, i.e., if not addressed early and controlled in the right direction to maintain the continuity of the heritage language.

Language Maintenance
Language maintenance (LM), on the other hand, is a term used to describe a situation when a speech community keeps using the language in one life domain or more, although contact occurs with the mainstream (more dominant/ spoken by the majority) language (Pauwels, 2004). In other words, LM is concerned with the retention of the minority language by its speakers when it is in constant contact with a majority language (Abdelhadi, 2017). LM was also defined by Baker (2011:72) as: "relative language stability in the number and distribution of its speakers, its proficient usage by children and adults, and its retention in specific domains (e.g., home, school)". Benrabah (2004) also explains that LM refers to the 'continuous use' of the mother tongue. According to him, in order for LM to occur, this 'continuous use' must happen regardless of any 'cultural pressure' from a more 'prestigious' or politically more dominant language. Therefore, to highlight the main difference between LS and LM, Veettil et al. (2020) explain that major language shift from one first language to another is usually slow, i.e. taking place across generations. They maintain that when this process of moving away from one's mother tongue to replace it with a newly adopted language is complete, there is said to be a language shift. On the other hand, if an individual or a community 'intransigently clings' to using their traditional first language, despite 'compelling situations' to replace it with another or even 'renounce' it, it is known as language maintenance. More importantly, Benrabah (2004) stresses that LM is needed to face the threat of a LS. Which, the researcher believes, is closely related to the aim of this current study. In other words, to prove that language maintenance is greatly needed if LS exists among the targeted sample of the study. In reference to this, Fishman (1972) proposes a method of what he called 'reversing language shift', in which he discusses the most appropriate method of 'revitalizing' an endangered language by assessing the degree to which it is 'disrupted'.

Language Loss
Fase, Jaspaert, and Kroon (1992) define language loss as occurring "when a minority group member cannot do the things with the minority language that he used to be able to do … some of the proficiency he used to have is no longer accessible" (p.8). Moreover, much of the literature dealing with first language loss is concerned with communal LS, i.e., the gradual substitution of the source language with the target language within a language community over an extended period of time (Anderson, 2012). He points out that LS results in changes in native language use with an 'eventual erosion' of abilities in the language. The author notes that the LS process usually occurs 'across generations' and is 'gradual' in nature. Language loss, however, according to Anderson, refers to a more rapid shift from first language prominence to second language prominence.
In addition, people may depart their homeland to live in foreign countries for different reasons such as war, economic, political, religious, or ethnic factors. Such immigrants may encounter various difficulties, one of which is the loss or shift of their mother tongue (Al-Jumaily, 2015). Literature shows that, in such new dominant communities, it is not only the language that changes but the cultural and social behavior of the minorities as well. It is quite common among researchers and scholars that if children in their new community become fluent in a second language, the first language consequently declines (Al-Jumaily, 2015). Similarly, Kouritzin (1997) discusses that, over several generations, each succeeding generation of families and language communities learns less and less of the minority language spoken, while they become progressively more dominant in the majority language.
Furthermore, Crawford (1995) stresses that even when 'good things' happen in educational programs, i.e. educational efforts to maintain the mother tongue, there is not much impact on the rate of language loss. According to him, despite the advent of bilingual education, especially since the mid-1970s, the shift to English is accelerating in many Indian communities.

Language Attrition
A related concept to language loss is known in literature as 'language attrition'. It also describes a form of language loss, however, it refers more specifically to 'the process' or stages of the loss itself. In other words, while language loss refers to the state of 'complete suppression' of an indigenous or mother tongue, i.e. the complete loss of the ability to communicate in that language, language attrition refers to the 'gradual reduction' or loss of linguistic knowledge and skills in an individual (Park, 2018). However, it is significant to mention that both terms are sometimes used interchangeably in the literature. Kouritzin (1997), for example, defined language attrition as "the loss of any language or any portion of a language by an individual or a speech community" (p.14). However, the literature shows that the questions on first language attrition still greatly 'outweigh the answers' even after years of diligent investigation and numerous theoretical and empirical papers, (Köpke and Schmid, 2004). Köpke and Schmid (2004) assert that findings from individual studies seem to indicate that it cannot even be said with any certainty whether a first language, in which a certain level of proficiency has been reached, can ever undergo significant attrition, let alone the questions of how or why it might happen.
Furthermore, research shows that work on language attrition actually started in the 1980s. More specifically, research on language attrition has undergone an increase, and started as a new area of linguistic inquiry, since the publication of The Loss of Language Skills, by Lambert and Freed in 1982. However, some scholars assert that such research is still very 'effervescent', sometimes yielding contradictory results (Kupske, 2020). For example, on the one hand, there are studies indicating that languages could be completely erased from the human brain. As in the one conducted by Pallier et al. (2003). In their study, they used 'event-related brain imaging technology' in an attempt to reveal apparent complete disappearance of L1 systems, i.e. after a long period of total lack of use. On the other hand, in a controversial study performed by Footnick (2007), by means of 'age-regression hypnosis', evidence was revealed indicating 'sustaining' 'long-standing knowledge' of a forgotten childhood language (Kupske, 2020). Furthermore, such studies can be said to show the relationship between LS effects and brain memory. A number of researchers have found evidence in support of language shift effect on memory (Marian and Neisser, 2000; Matsumoto and Stanny, 2006; Wang, 2022). Such studies found that language shift would significantly decrease people's memory performance, which they defined as 'language shift effect'. According to them, the effect of LS is clear when people encode an episode or a text in one language but retrieve the encoded information in another language. For example, Marian and Neisser (2000) examined language shift effect among Russian-English bilinguals. The study showed that their 'episodic memory' was more accessible when the encoding and retrieval languages were 'matched' than when they were 'mismatched'. This, they maintain, demonstrates a 'language-dependent phenomenon'. They explained that shifting from one language to another when 'encoding' and 'retrieving' past episodes would lead to 'larger processing costs' (i.e. longer mental processing time). Additionally, similar findings are reported in Matsumoto and Stanny's study (2006) of Japanese-English bilinguals. Their study showed that the 'episodic memory' being retrieved at the test was mostly 'encoded' in the same language as the 'cue words'. Wang (2022) asserts that such studies have provided evidence for 'language-dependent memory' and language shift effect on 'autobiographic memory retrieval'.

Bilingualism
Bilingualism is a common social and linguistic phenomenon. Al-Jumaily (2015) asserts that it is neither rare nor unusual. Moreover, bilingual education, according to him, builds upon the students' cognitive development in his/her native language as a means to develop conceptual skills in two languages. Al-Jumaily believes that there are different theories on the best way to teach a child to use two languages. He explains that most researchers agree that a child who is exposed to two languages at an early age can naturally and simultaneously learn to use both languages. Parents on the other hand are different in their perspectives regarding their children's academic education. Al-Jumaily maintains that while some parents prefer monolingual education, others prefer to enroll their children in bilingual education. In other words, some parents want children in English-only programs because they want them to learn English, in order to prepare them for the future and better job opportunities. These parents, according to Al-Jumaily, do not want their children to learn their first language while they are learning English, and think it unnecessary. In other words, such parents are against bilingual acquisition, and therefore, they raise their kids as English monolinguals. Conversely, other parents not only support the bilingual model of all available programs but the 'dual language' or 'two-way immersion programs' as well.
Furthermore, it is important to mention that 'bilingualism' is not only significant but rather necessary to point out, since many scholars find the concept closely related to LS, even a precursor to LS in most cases (Holmes and Wilson, 2017). Not to mention that proponents of bilingual education believe that the benefits of being bilingual are great in terms of increased linguistic abilities, cultural awareness, opportunities, and even social cognitive development (Al-Jumaily, 2015).
A relative term in the literature is 'early sequential bilingualism' which is used to refer to the order in which young children acquire two or more languages. According to Altman et al (2017) bilingual language acquisition in children can proceed either 'simultaneously' or 'sequentially'. The former refers to the situation when children are exposed to both languages from birth, and, consequently, the languages develop together as two first languages. The latter, on the other hand, happens when one language is acquired from birth and the exposure to the other starts between the age of 3 and 6. The authors further explain that in 'early sequential bilingualism', the language acquired from birth is denoted as the first language (L1), while the second language (L2) is used to refer to the language whose acquisition starts after children acquired a basic command of the first language, which according to them, occurs between the ages of 3 and 4. They further explain that the acquisition of the first language is then used to 'scaffold' the acquisition of the second language.
Moreover, a significant concept that is related to bilingualism is 'code-switching' which refers to the linguistic behavior in which speakers move between two languages while conversing (Harley, 2008). In other words, it refers to the 'behavior' itself of switching between the two or more languages rather than the knowledge or acquisition of such languages, which refers more to bilingualism. Code-switching, according to Bichani (2015), can be considered one manifestation of the way in which bilingual individuals 'negotiate' and 'practice' language choice. According to her, the literature nowadays considers code-switching to be a normal and regular feature of bilingual language use. Not to mention that many scholars believe that code-switching is an extremely common feature of bilingual communities (see Clyne, 2003;Harris, 2006;Lawson and Sachdev, 2004;Pan, 1995;Wei, 1994;Wei and Wu, 2009). For example, Wei and Wu (2009:193) described code-switching as "the most distinctive behavior of the bilingual speaker… there is no better behavioral indicator to show that a speaker is bilingual than when s/he is using two languages simultaneously in social interaction".
Moreover, a number of motives for switching between languages among bilinguals have been proposed. Coulmas (2005) argues that code-switching is driven by a number of social and pragmatic motivations. One may be the speakers' attempts to draw attention to specific points in the conversation (Wei, 1994). Myers-Scotton (2006) maintain that code-switching may also help fill in pragmatic gaps. They explain that some expressions are more appropriate for use in one language than the other, or they can be used to fill in lexical gaps, as some speakers may not know the meaning of a term in one of the languages.
Furthermore, another relative term to the current study is 'family language planning' (FLP) which reflects the 'language ideology' of parents (which simply means someone's belief whether or not the language should be used or not). In a broader perspective, FLP reflects not only the parents' language ideology but also the language attitudes, ideologies, and bringing up styles of society as a whole (Zou, 2022). For Zou (2022) asserts that social and family environment plays a key role in the formation of 'parents' language ideology' and has an effect on parents' decisions in language management, more specifically, parents or caregiver's 'explicit' and 'implicit' planning for language use and learning at home.
Similarly, Idaryani and Fidyati (2022) believe that 'parental language ideology' at home influences the shaping of 'family language policy'. Hence, FLP determines what language is spoken and not spoken at home. They further maintain that 'parental language ideology' determines whether the parents raise their children as monolingual, bilingual, or even multilingual. However, Idaryani and Fidyati (2022) stress that it is quite a loss when parents decide not to raise their children to be bilingual because children have a big opportunity to be bilingual or multilingual speakers. For, they believe that, if the children are raised as monolingual people, they can lose some benefits as bilinguals.

English Hegemony
Other concepts linked to LS are also described, namely 'language hegemony'. English hegemony, in particular, means that the English language is considered to have so much authority and weight that it is perceived to have control over other languages. As over 1.4 billion people speak English, which makes it the most spoken language in the world, one can see the influence of English worldwide (Raine, 2012). It is argued that English essentially belongs to everyone who speaks it. Furthermore, scholars assert that there are more non-native speakers than native speakers of this language, to the extent that English has become the second language of everybody (Hargraves, 2003). Thus, it appears that English exerts its influence in all corners of the world.
Moreover, the functions of English have changed in the past decades. For example, nowadays, English has become an international lingua franca. It is widely used in academia, even in countries in which English is not considered a national language. Berg et al. (2001) assert that English is introduced as a school subject in lower grades, and is the medium of instruction in many high schools worldwide. They further stress that its role at the workplace appears more prominent worldwide, i.e., not just in academia.
The concept of 'hegemony' in general is described by Antonio Gramsci (1971) as 'domination by consent'. In relation to 'English hegemony' in particular, and in the context of English education, critical scholars advocate that the implementation of English teaching and learning in 'non-native-English-speaking countries' is more than a simple linguistic or pedagogical policy (Gramsci, 1971). In addition, Chuang (2019) maintains that such scholars employ 'labels' that reflect the powerful status of the English language as well as its related the colonial histories. More specifically, he explains that it represents the forceful impacts resulting from the spread and the globalization of the English language.
Furthermore, Beukes (2015) stresses that this influence is considered so integral that English will probably maintain its position as seemingly the number one language in the world throughout the 21 st century. He also explains that people who can converse in English should be able to speak to people in most large cities in the world. This, the researcher believes, comes as no surprise, especially that no one can deny that English has become the 'Lingua Franca' of the world nowadays, due to the economical, and political powers of the original speakers of the language.

Factors Affecting LS
Every day we are required to use language in different ways, depending on where we are, whom we are with, what we hope to achieve, and how we want others to react to us. Consequently, all of this have a direct or an indirect impact on LS as well. Crawford (1995) noted that so far no one has developed a comprehensive theory of LS, the various conditions that cause it, what prevents it from happening, and what can help to reverse it. He further stresses that many researchers focused on the success of language maintenance rather than on LS (like in: Benrabah, 2004; Abdelhadi, 2017). However, this paper focuses on LS phenomena by assessing the underlying factors that cause it. Several factors are anticipated to be responsible for accelerating LS, which can be summarized below: Fishman (1972) suggests that it is important to deal with the relationship between the 'degree of change' or 'stability' both in language usage patterns and ongoing psychological, social, or cultural processes in populations that employ more than one language. Thus, undoubtedly, language use is closely related to different social issues. For example, language and social contact is about how we use language to relate to other people within our communities. Different social factors have come to be known to greatly affect our language use. This is especially relevant to the current study, since different social factors play a significant role in the younger generation's occasional shift to English in their daily interaction. Social factors, such as pressure from peers or parents or even the wider society to communicate in English in certain domains are strong influences that drive the younger generation towards more usage of the foreign language. According to Nawaz, Umer, Anjum and Ramzan (2012), the social structure put the person who speaks fluent English in a 'privileged' position with more opportunities while others could be 'marginalized'.

Socio-cultural Factors
Additionally, Bowern (2017) maintains that children from the early stages are aware of the function of language as a 'groupsignaling device'. According to him, children at the stage of development are becoming more aware of 'peer structures' and have started to form their own peer groups. Simultaneously, they are learning how to use language to mark and reinforce 'group affiliations' and thus beginning to accommodate to one another. This, according to Bowern, means that 'language preservation' in the home domain only is 'insufficient'. Similarly, in her research on peer play in Dominica, Paugh (2005) showed that young children were able to use language to index particular 'social identities' while enacting adult roles such as teachers and farmers. This is a clear indication of how young children associate different language use to different social roles within their surrounding society.
Researchers such as Clyne (2003); Holmes (2001) and Myers-Scotton (2006), propose a number of other social factors as causes of LS. Factors such as exogamous marriages (i.e. marrying from outside the social group) and English proficiency within the parent generation. For they maintain that parents with high proficiency in English encouraged language shift among their children, while children with low English proficiency parents are forced to use the first language to communicate with their parents, which, consequently, results in maintaining the mother tongue. Another social factor linguists refer to is 'family relations' and its influence in maintaining/ or diminishing the ethnic language. They assert that the more positively the children perceive the relations with the families, the more likely they will use and maintain their first language (Tannenbaum and Howie, 2002). Not to mention, the frequent communication with the homeland for migrants.
Furthermore, linguists have referred constantly to the effect of 'dislocation', either socially or culturally, in accelerating the LS process. Although the effect of 'dislocation' is not regarded as a playing factor of LS in the current study, it is deemed significant to refer to it as an important factor of LS. For example, Fishman (1991) identifies three main types of 'dislocation' that, according to him, influence language shifts in a community. They are: physical (demographic), social and cultural dislocation. Below is a brief description of the three types.
a. physical dislocation According to linguists, physical factors such as human conflicts (e.g. wars, genocide or ethnic cleansing) or more recently urbanization, has all been found to have a huge impact on the speed of language shift. Linguists maintain that urban groups tend to form new social networks which increase communication with the 'out-group' community (Fishman, 1991;Gal, 1979;Holmes, 2001). Conversely, rural groups living in more isolated areas can satisfy most of their social needs by using their minority language (Holmes, 2001). In addition, and in relation to the physical factor, demographic factors, such as the size of the group, has also been recognized by linguists as an influential factor in shifting the group's language. According to Holmes (2001), groups with large concentrations of numbers show more 'resistance' to language shift. b. Social dislocation Fishman (1991) explains that members of socially dislocated communities (like immigrants) are often at a social disadvantage, due to a number of factors. Factors such as; their minority status, low incomes and limited access to educational and cultural institutions. He further asserts that such communities may be 'stigmatized' and, as a result, the community members may develop a negative attitude towards their own community, its culture and language (Fishman, 1991). Indeed, some speakers, especially the younger generations, may reject the culture of their minority language in favor of a more dominant and privileged one. And, as a consequence, they are found to reject their original language and adopt the dominant majority language. This happens, according to Fishman, in order to 'integrate' with the new community, which is more likely to increase the speed of language shift. c. Cultural dislocation: Fishman maintains that 'cultural dislocation' occurs when the dominant ruling group intentionally exercises its 'hegemony' as the most powerful culture in a community. This power is practiced through many aspects, more importantly through 'language dominance', such as the official language used in governmental institutions and education. This imposing factor pressures the minority cultures to use the dominant language more, thus playing a strong role in LS, especially among the young. This factor will be discussed further in the following 'Education Policies Factor'. Nawaz et al. (2012) maintain that economic factors in any society represent the basis for all social patterns, including the change in language use. As Holmes (2001:59) points out, "Rapid shift occurs when people are anxious to get on, in a society where knowledge of the second language is a prerequisite for success". More importantly, they assert that nowadays the English language emphasizes financial security. According to the authors, one can get high-level jobs only if he knows the English language well. They further stress that the importance of English for success in any field lies in the fact that it is the language of financial activities. For example, in her key note presentation at the 2018 International Creole Studies Conference, University of the Seychelles, Professor Marie-Therese Choppy confirmed a shift from Seselwa towards English in the home domain, with parents choosing to speak English to their children to increase their chances of success at school and future jobs. This, in the researcher's point of view, is a crucial factor in accelerating a LS, i.e., parents' worry about their children's future and better job opportunities. The economic factor can also play an important role in promoting this shift. More specifically, LS seem to be prevalent among the children who study in international schools in Riyadh. These schools are only affordable to families with relatively high income. Dorian (1982) suggests that although shift often seems to take place very quickly over just one or two generations, the 'sociocultural-attitudinal climate' which leads to that shift can take 'centuries in the making'. She also notes that even if it seems to the outsider that the shift, or what she called the 'tip' toward English, is quick and sudden, the forces and attitudes which led to that 'tip' can be felt years before the shift takes place.

Psychological /Attitudinal Factors
Moreover, attitudes towards languages are not easy to either define nor measure or predict. Since, according to Garett (2010), they are 'multi-dimensional' and can manifest themselves in a range of behaviors and subjective views. Sevinc (2017: 4), for instance, defines attitude as "a psychological tendency that is expressed by evaluating a particular entity with some degree of favor or disfavor". On the other hand, Garett (2010: 20) proposes a general definition of attitude which, according to him, is "an evaluative orientation to a social object of some sort whether it is language, or a new government policy, etc.". He further describes that attitudes can be defined as comprising three main constituents; cognitive, affective and behavioral. According to him, 'cognitive' refers to the influence of attitudes on an individual's views of the world and particular incidents; 'affective' involves emotions in relation to the attitude item; and 'behavioral' refers to the interference of attitudes in behavior.
Moreover, there is a general consensus in the literature that acquiring and using a language is easier for individuals who have a positive attitude towards the language and its speakers, and hence influence their choice. For example, Baker (1992) and Holmes et al. (2001) highlight the importance of language attitudes in shifting or maintaining the language. Baker suggests that "In the life of a language, attitudes to that language appear to be important in language restoration, preservation, decay or death" (Baker, 1992:9). Similarly, Holmes et al. (2001) also found that positive attitudes motivated the speakers of the minority language to use their language in various domains, and this, according to them, helped challenge the slow shift to the mainstream language.
Similarly, Fishman (1991); and Gardner and Lambert (1972) all assert that there is strong association between language attitudes and actual language skills. They discuss that positive attitudes toward one's ethnic language often result in increased efforts in learning it in higher proficiency levels. For example, among Spanish-speaking teenagers in Australia, there is a strong and direct connection between positive attitudes toward bilingualism and greater Spanish proficiency (Gibbons and Ramirez, 2004). Similarly, Zentella (1997) and Potowski (2004) reported that the Spanish-speakers in the United States, for example, hold positive attitudes toward Spanish, but almost all of them clearly shift to English by the third generation.
On a similar note, Oakes' (2013) study of attitudes towards the Réunionnais language by university students showed that although the use of the language was associated with the Reunionese identity it was mostly used in private spheres, such as the home domain. According to Oake, more importantly, the students did not think that knowledge of Réunionnais would make them more 'employable'. Oakes further predicted that the decline in 'passing' of the language may result in a shift in the future, i.e. away from the native tongue towards French. In addition, Sallabank's (2013) investigation of language attitudes in Guernsey revealed a similar finding. She maintains that despite positive attitudes towards Guernesiais, for it was viewed as a valued cultural heritage, the language was not being transmitted to younger generations, and teaching in schools was not effective either in maintaining the mother tongue. She further recommended a 'revitalization project' where various 'stakeholders' could collaborate together to reverse the process of language loss (Bedford, 2021). In addition, Zhang & Slaughter-Defoe (2009) stress that, with strong positive attitudes toward the heritage language, the Chinese parents are willing to spend considerable time, money, and energy to help their children maintain Chinese. However, the scholars show that, in spite of this, and to the great disappointment of the parents, only few of the Chinese children see the heritage language as important. The authors further explain that most Chinese children, especially older children, feel that Chinese is something they have to learn only in order to obey their parents. Yet the children do not feel that their native tongue is important or necessary.
Furthermore, in terms of the English language in particular, Nawaz et al. (2012) also explain that the experience of dealing with English-speaking people affects the general culture of the community. According to them, some people assume that Englishspeaking foreigners have a 'preference', which leads many young people to try to speak English.
On the other hand, some linguists like Potowski (2013) believe that although positive attitudes are not enough to guarantee language maintenance, negative attitudes often lead to rapid LSs. Kuncha and Bathula (2004), for example, show that more than half of the Telugu-speaking mothers and children in New Zealand felt it was a 'waste of time' to learn Telugu; for, they were shifting to English after an average of just two years. Similarly, Agyekum (2010) shows that, in Ghana, some bilingual children in the early stages of school insist that their parents speak English with them. Not only that, the children sometimes express some feelings of shame if their parents speak the local languages with them. As English, Agyekum explains, is the official language and the medium of instruction in Ghana. And as children grow up, the author maintains, some of them bear with their parents, others, however, insist on this LS phenomenon (to English) especially when their colleagues visit them in their homes. It can be difficult, therefore, to maintain a language if there are negative attitudes towards it in a community, whether it be from the children or their parents or from the community as a whole.
Furthermore, Chung (2020) asserts that family and parental perspectives regarding language are very crucial to language planning. More specifically, he believes that parents' beliefs about language and their language ideologies affect not only the languages they choose to speak at home but also how they affect the linguistic decisions of their children. According to Chung, the language ideologies are 'context-specific' and related to parental educational experiences and expectations. Not to mention 'interwoven' with economic, political, socio-cultural, and linguistic factors as well, as mentioned before. Further he adds that the children's language choices may be impacted by parents' expectations, parent's education and language experience, or even parental knowledge of bilingualism. Such past experiences, he explains, serve as a driving force for parental expectations, school choices, and family language policies. On a similar note, Mitchell et al. (2007), in their study of Saint Lucian Creole on the island of Saint Croix in the Caribbean, found that social networks as well as language attitudes of parents at home were determining factors in the maintenance of the native tongue. (2019) show that the research on family language planning (FLP/ mentioned before in the 'bilingualism' section) has drawn upon interviews and surveys to examine the linguistic ideologies and beliefs of parents as the 'language managers' at home. However, on the other hand, they add that recent 'ethnographically informed studies' on bi-/multilingual families' language socialization patterns have also highlighted the children's role in influencing FLP. In agreement, Zou (2022) stresses that the initiative of children, i.e. children's choice of language, also greatly affects the actual language use in the family. Which, according to him, explains why some children refuse to speak their mother tongue, as they prefer to use the language of school peers. Mirvahedi and Cavallaro (2019) maintain that this growing body of FLP work focuses upon how family members use interactional strategies 'implicitly' to socialize with each other through their choice of language, i.e. either a heritage language or an L2 or L3. Thus, according to them, such research emphasizes the 'limitless' influence of family discourse on the 'configuration' of language development during childhood.

Moreover, Mirvahedi and Cavallaro
Furthermore, the attitudes of the educational personnel have also proven to have an impact on students' language use and preferences. Schwarz and Nick's (2018) study of 'official trilingualism' (English, French, Seselwa or Seychellois Creole) in the Seychelles, revealed that teachers prefer English as the medium of instruction in schools. This, according to them have played a significant role in spreading the positive attitude among the younger students to use English more than the ethnic tongue in daily communication.
However, some researchers, such as Fishman (1985) have argued that language attitudes do not always predict language maintenance or shift. According to him, attitudes need to be linked to the 'language's status' as a 'core value' in a particular group or related to other values such as religious beliefs. Core values, according to Fishman, refer to the factors that are perceived as the most essential and important in forming a group's identity and culture. Similarly, Baker (1992) states that respondents in interviews and questionnaires may shape their attitudes to make themselves appear more 'desirable' or 'pleasant' for the researcher. Not to mention, he adds that respondents may be influenced by the researcher and the aim of the research. Therefore, Baker asserts that a diverse method of investigation and a comparison between reported and observed attitudes should always be considered, which is why the current study applies a triangular method for collecting data.
Furthermore, Garrett (2010) explains that there are three common ways for investigating attitudes which differ in the frequency of their use. The three techniques he proposes are: 'societal treatment studies', 'direct measures' and 'indirect measures'. According to him, societal treatment studies involve 'inferring participants' attitudes', which can be collected from policy documents, media scripts, advertisements and other sources. The second method of investigation, i.e. the direct measures, which he explains is also known as 'evaluation preference', includes asking participants direct questions regarding their language attitude, which according to him is usually undertaken through questionnaires, interviews and surveys. In relation to the third type, i.e. the indirect methods, Garrett maintains that they refer to eliciting the language attitudes of the participants using techniques without asking direct questions. He explains that the most common technique in this method is what is known as 'the matched guise technique', which according to him, is a sociolinguistic experimental technique first introduced by Wallace Lambert in the 1960s. In 'the matched guise technique' human subjects listen to recordings of speakers of two or more languages and make judgements about various traits of those speakers. However, in terms of frequency, Garrett asserts that the direct approach is the most common technique, followed by the indirect approach, with the societal treatment technique being less used in most language attitude research. In relation to the current study, the direct approach will be used to elicit the attitudes of the subjects through interviews and questionnaires, i.e. along with the observation activities of the children.
In agreement with the above studies, the researcher believes that both positive and negative attitudes of either the society, parents, and their children can all play a significant role in promoting or impeding LS among the younger generation. In other words, positive attitudes toward a foreign language, i.e. English in this study, often result in increased efforts in learning it in higher proficiency levels. On the other hand, negative attitudes of the parents or children towards the native language, however, will cause less and less usage of that language in different daily domains, which will consequently lead to an inevitable LS. Therefore, I believe examining attitudes is relevant to the study, as I am particularly interested in my participants' attitudes toward both Arabic and English languages.

Education Policies Factors
Some linguists assert that LS occurs due to the type of language policy a nation or an institution adopts. Johnson (2013) emphasizes the powerful role that practitioners play in language policy processes. The following quote (taken from Johnson' Language Policy,

The exercise of language planning leads to, or is directed by, the promulgation of a language policy by government (or other authoritative body or person). A language policy is a body of ideas, laws, regulations, rules and practices intended to achieve the planned language change in the societies, group or system. (Kaplan and Baldauf 1997: xi)
In Ghana, for example, Agyekum (2010) shows that since English is the official language and medium of instruction in education, there exists an undeniable LS from the Ghanaian languages to English. He explains that whilst English is 'core' and compulsory at the high school, the various Ghanaian languages are electives. In fact, Agyekum further explains, there are English proficiency requirements for entering high school or tertiary institutions in Ghana.
Furthermore, Bowern (2017) explains that language policies and support, particularly in education, can be considered one of the 'community-level' factors that lead to LS. Educational language policies, according to Bowern, include: 'language documentation' (recording, analyzing, and compiling corpora of languages), 'language revitalization' (using existing records to create new words and new contexts for language use), and 'language contact' (how languages are 'structurally' affected by speakers' exposure to and use of multiple languages).
Moreover, education policies of different countries, known as acquisition planning, have a strong impact on how languages of the younger generations develop. Fillmore (1991), for example, explains what happened when young immigrant children in Texas found themselves in the attractive new world of the American schools. They discovered that the only language that is spoken there is one that they do not know. Not only that, they also realized that the only language they do know has no function or value in that new social world, and that it constitutes a 'barrier' to their 'integration' in the school community as well as the social life in general. So, in response to this, they did just as the 'promoters' of early education for language-minority students hoped they will. They learned English, and very often, they dropped their primary languages. Fillmore explains that, in time, many of these children lose their first languages. Furthermore, scholars believe that it is also necessary to investigate the different factors that influence the choice and use of one of the languages over another. The following section sheds light on some of these factors.

Language Choice
Linguists have identified a number of factors they believe influence language choice and language use. Factors such as: domain, interlocutors, topic, and social network (Bichani, 2015;Wei,1994). The following is a brief description of those factors: 1) Domain: According to Fishman (2000), language speakers tend to associate certain languages with specific domains. For instance, the language used at home, or within a neighborhood, may be different from the language used at school or work. To define domain more specifically, linguist explain that 'domain' refers to the concept that each language or variety of language is assigned to particular 'function' or 'space' and particular participants in the society (Spolsky, 2012; Weinreich, 1953). For example, language used in the work domain, family domain or religious domain, etc. Fishman (1972) argues that domain is a useful idea in investigating individual and community language use.

2) Interlocutors:
Language choice is also influenced by interlocutors' different variables, such as age and gender. Some scholars suggest that language choice/use may be related to the speakers' age (Harris, 2006;Namei, 2008;Wei, 1994). For example, Wei (1994) found that, for reasons mostly related to their social networks and limited English, older family members in the Chinese community in Newcastle mainly spoke Chinese. Other scholars show that gender differences are also believed to have an effect on language use patterns. Harris (2006) and Wei (1994), for example, maintain that in some communities where English is the language of work and formal communication, male involvement in life outside the house allows them to use English more than females.
3) Topic: Fishman (2000:92) suggests that, in particular multilingual contexts, "certain topics are somehow handled better in one language than in another". Thus, many linguists believe that language choice is influenced by the topic under discussion. This may be due to the lack of required vocabulary in the other language, or the speakers' limited competence/knowledge in the subject matters (Ritchie and Bhatia, 2013). For example, Lawson and Sachdev (2004) point out that while Bengali was used with topics related to family issues, English was mostly used while discussing school matters. Wilson and Holmes (2017) also refer to the effect of topic of the discussion on language choice. According to them, this was clearly illustrated in the linguistic behavior of university students in Hemnesberget (a village in northern Norway). The students tended to switch between two distinct dialects, 'Ranamal' and 'Bokmal' when they discussed certain topics. They used the local dialect 'Ranamal' when they discussed common topics at home and with the villagers, however, they switched 'unconsciously' to 'Bokmal' when they begin discussing national politics (p.5-6)

4) Social network:
Language use is not entirely predictable from the domain or topic of discussion. It is also associated with the 'linguistic interaction' that takes place within a group (Wei, 1994). More specifically, language choice tends to follow the speakers' 'reactions' to the 'behavior' of other actors in a particular context.
To explain this approach, two theories can be considered: the 'accommodation theory' and the 'social network approach'. The former theory says that "speakers tend to accommodate their speech to persons whom they like or whom they wish to be liked by" (Myers-Scotton, 2006: 131). In other words, speakers use language as a way of 'assimilating' within the new community, which in turn could result in LS (Myers-Scotton, 2006).
In terms of the latter approach, Wei (1994) argues that social network factors may also influence language choice. According to this theory, Wei explains that "There is a dialectic relationship between speakers' linguistic behaviors and [their] interpersonal relations" (Wei, 1994:23). Therefore, he stresses that, in multilingual settings, language choice is affected by, and affects, the speakers' social interactions. Holmes and Wilson (2017) mention an example of the social network effecting the language choice. According to them, in Oberwart, an Austrian town on the border of Hungary, where the community was gradually shifting from Hungarian to German, interactions between older people and peasants tended to remain in Hungarian. However, in the same community, interactions between the younger generations and those who worked in industrial jobs tended to be in German.
Moreover, another significant factor affecting language shift is the 'ethno-linguistic vitality' (EV) of the group, which can be seen as not only related the previous factors, but also interwoven with some of them. The following is a brief explanation of EV.

Ethno-linguistic vitality (EV)
Ethno-linguistic vitality (EV) is a linguistic concept that is thought to be significant to the current study because it can be useful in anticipating the future of a language. According to Clyne (2003) the concept of EV was developed from Tajfel's (1974) 'intergroup relations theory', and Giles' 'speech accommodation model' (the latter concept was explained in the previous section). EV was defined by Myers-Scotton (2006) as "what the group thinks about itself in relation to other groups" (2006: 74). However, it was initially defined by Giles et al. (1977: 308) as, "that which makes a group likely to behave as a distinctive and active collective entity in inter-group situations". In other words, it relates to the group's own awareness of their 'existence' as a 'distinctive entity' compared to other groups in the community (Bichani, 2015).
Moreover, a number of researchers (Myers-Scotton, 2006;Pauwels, 2004;Yagmur, De Bot and Hubert, 1999;Yagmur, 2011;Yagmur, 2009;Bichani, 2015) argue that the EV of a group correlates with the group's language shift/maintenance. In other words, groups with high EV are more likely to maintain their language and preserve their collective identity than groups with low EV. Measuring the degree of the EV of a group can be done through analyzing a number of linguistic and social dimensions as suggested by some researchers. The following is a brief description of such dimensions: According to Bichani (2015) EV is sometimes discussed in two dimensions; namely objective and subjective. Myers-Scotton (2006) explains that the 'psychological factors', such as attitudes, are considered to constitute 'subjective vitality', while the 'sociological factors' are often referred to as 'objective vitality'.
Concerning subjective EV (SEV), Bichani (2015) maintains that it is related to the 'speakers' attitude' towards their language and their 'estimation' of that language, especially in comparison to other languages within the community. I can say that SEV is specifically relevant to the study because it investigates the participants' attitudes towards their language, and the impact of language attitudes of the participants on the patterns of language use.
On the other hand, regarding the objective EV, Yagmur and Akinci (2003) explain that it can be referred to as the 'group factor', which according to them, consists of three constituents: Do these constituents apply to the sample you are investigating?

Other Factors
Religious institutions, such as mosques and churches, can play a positive role in preserving the ethnic minority group's language (Hatoss and Sheely, 2009; Holmes, 2001;Yagmur and Akinci, 2003;Bichani, 2015). This can also be said towards first languages that may be under threat of loss. For, language and religion are believed to be linked in various ways. For example, Crystal (1965) argues that language is the 'vehicle' through which beliefs and religious rituals are expressed. In agreement, Myers-Scotton (2006: 21) assert that language can also "be created along religious lines", as in the example of Hindi and Urdu, which both evolved from the Hindustani language. Suleiman (2004) similarly maintains that the current position of Arabic and its associated heritage would not have been achieved without Arabic's close association with Islam. Thus, it can be said that religious practices, either in homes or mosques, along with studying religious scripts at school, can all play a positive role in preserving the first language.
In agreement, Beyers (2017) maintains that religion and culture exist in a close relation, and both are 'undeniably' related to the language spoken by the people. Fishman (1999) stresses that certain languages, like Arabic, Hebrew and Greek, are considered 'sacred' languages because they are used in religious books and sacred rituals. Thus, according to him, the loss of certain languages has sometimes been found to be accompanied by the loss of the associated religion within certain groups. For example, the loss of one of the Chinese dialects in Singapore led to the loss of the associated religion "Taoism" (Chew, 2006:230).
In addition, linguists stress the value of the language among the speakers, which refer to the factors that are perceived as the most essential in forming a group's identity and culture, as a crucial factor in preserving/diminishing the language. They believe that language shift seems to be slower in communities where language is regarded by the speakers as a 'core value' (Somlicz, 1980;1981). In other words, language appears to be better maintained in communities where it is perceived as a marker of identity (Holmes et al., 1993).
Moreover, other factors such as the international status of a language can also contribute to the success of maintaining it, as the high status of a language has a positive impact on the dominant society's attitudes towards it (Holmes, 2001). Not to mention the time factor which is well known to be the most powerful factor to change everything, and language is not to escape this change definitely (Bichani, 2015). In fact, language, and the changes it undergoes, is one of the most prevalent evidence of the inescapable effect of time.
Therefore, it is clear that the phenomenon of LS is influenced by a set of factors that depend on many aspects that exist in the culture of society. A phenomenon that does not start suddenly but goes through several stages, and has historical, social, economic and psychological roots as well.

Language Use Domains and their Relation to LS
Although the domain concept has been briefly discussed above in relation to language use/choice, the following section will explain it in more detail and shed light on its close relation to LS from a sociolinguistic perspective. Boxer (2002: 4) suggests that, in sociolinguistics, the concept 'domain' refers to "a sphere of life in which verbal and nonverbal interactions occur". In reference to the relationship between domains and LS, Duan (2004) shows that LS is a term that describes a phenomenon in which members of a community use different languages or speech varieties in different 'social situations'. These 'social situations' are referred to as 'domains'. Duan further explains that within these domains, and by implication, there are 'norms' that are developed for 'intraethnic' and 'inter-ethnic' communication.
Moreover, domains include the areas of work, i.e. family, school and other educational institutions, circle of friends, and wider communication contexts. In multilingual societies, one language or language variety is more likely to be used in specific domains than another (Dyers, 2008). Similarly, Heinrich (2015: 616) maintains that the theoretical concept of 'domain' refers to "clusters of types of interaction relevant to a specific community at a specific period of time". These 'clusters' of interaction types, according to him, require one specific language as the 'default' choice.
In addition, according to Fishman (1966Fishman ( , 1972, domains are 'institutional contexts' in which a language is used, and these domains are organized into specific role-relationships, as follows: 1) Role relation between participants.

3) Place of interaction.
Fishman further explains that, since the number and character of domains differ according to the 'language environment' of the communities in question, no 'fixed inventory' of domains exists.
Additionally, Okpanachi and Joseph (2017) suggest that domains of language use differ from one community to the other, and accordingly, the functions allocated to each of the domains vary. Hence, they classified the domains of language use into the following: 1) At home with members of the family. Apparently, although LS and language domains refer to two different concepts, they are closely related, as they interact in a gradual, sometimes hard to separate, manner. In other words, LS is a gradual process occurring in one domain after the other, however, some domains like religion and home are more resistant to LS than others, such as …. Heinrich (2015), for instance, discusses that LS gradually proceeds from domain to domain. According to him, once the domain of home has been affected, a language becomes endangered.

Types of LS
Various classifications of LS have been set forth in the literature. Clyne (2003), for example, as part of his investigation into linguistic behavior and the 'dynamics of language shift' among migrants in Australia, refers to two types of language shift. The two types he proposes are: 'intra-generational' and 'inter-generational' shifts. Clyne maintains that 'intra-generational' LS refers to a shift within the same generation, while 'inter-generational' LS refers to language shift between the second and third generations of a migrant group. He explains that the degree of language shift is usually higher in the second generation than in the first generation. Clyne further differentiates between language shift in the second generation and the 'non-acquisition of a language'. For he asserts that some of the second generation speakers, i.e. the younger generations, do not acquire the 'first' language in the first place (Clyne, 2003).
Tandefelt (1992), on the other hand, differentiates between four types of language shift. The types he proposes are: 'partial', 'total', 'macro-level' and 'micro-level' shifts. According to him, 'partial' refers to the 'on-going' process of LS in the community, while 'total' indicates the "point of no return" in language shift (Tandefelt, 1992: 151). As for the third type, the 'macro-level' shift, Tandefelt explains that it refers to the language shift of the whole community, while the fourth type, the 'micro-level' shift, refers to an individual's linguistic behavior (Tandefelt, 1992).

Stages of LS
Researchers have identified a number of stages that a speech community goes through when it experiences a LS. The identification of such stages is crucial for determining which stage a specific speech community is going through, and consequently, how severe is the LS and what are the possible suggested maintenance measures that are suitable for each stage.
Fishman (1991) introduced a scale of eight stages to identify the level of 'endangerment' experienced by a given language, which consequently may lead to LS. This scale, which he called 'Graded Intergenerational Disruption GIDS)', can be described as follows: 1) Stage 1: indicates the case in which the endangered language occupies professional, educational, media domains and governmental. 2) Stage 2: language is employed only in the mass media and lower spheres of government. 3) Stage 3: language domains becomes limited to the lower work levels. 4) Stage 4: language is confined to basic school education. 5) Stage 5: education using mother tongue language is achieved only within the community or at home. 6) Stage 6: first language attained only orally from the older generation. 7) Stage 7: The community is fully integrated into the dominant language, as the people keep speaking the endangered language very little, which impedes direct 'intergenerational transmission.' 8) Stage 8: The first language is spoken by a reduced number of the elderly, who cannot have much syntactic structures or vocabulary, and are at best described as 'passive' or 'semi-speakers'.
Another account of these stages was provided by Puthuval (2017) Throughout all three stages, the author stresses, the shift to Chinese language has gradually proceeded, and bilingual children would sometimes grow up speaking only Chinese but would more often maintain both languages (Mongolian and Chinese). Puthuval further explains that, only in the third stage, the population who spoke Mongolian reached a stage where a complete shift to Chinese became a possibility. Moreover, the authors explain that communities experiencing LS are usually: monolingual in their mother tongue, then bilingual in their mother tongue and a foreign language, then monolingual in the foreign language. As mentioned before, bilingualism is always connected to LS phenomenon, and many researchers regard it as a precursor that must exist before a LS can occur (Holmes & Wilson, 2017). Similarly, Andriyanti (2019) explains that language shift has three stages. According to him the first stage shows increased pressure on minority language speakers to speak the majority language particularly in some domains. However, in the second stage speakers still use both minority and majority languages, yet the number of minority language speakers decreases especially among the younger generation. The third stage, Andriyanti maintains, is when the minority language has been replaced by the majority language. For it is no longer spoken widely and is only remembered by a small group of speakers.
According to Masruddin (2013), based on the ideas of Wurm (1984), there are 5 stages of a LS, going through from the endangered one to the other language: 1) Potentially endangered languages: languages which have a very 'big potential' to be 'dead languages'. For example, when a language is left behind in social and economic contexts, due to forces from more advanced languages, like English. This can be seen clearly when children start to leave their mother tongue and tend to speak more in English. 2) Endangered languages: languages which are 'threatened' to be 'death languages'. It is because only a very small number of their young generation keep using their mother tongue. The fluent speakers of such a language are only the 'mature' speakers. 3) Seriously endangered languages: languages which are 'really threatened' to be 'death languages'. It is because the active speakers are up to 50 years old and above. For example, the Aramaic language in Syria. 4) 'Moribund' languages: languages which are in a 'dying' condition. This, according to Masruddin, occurs when the only speakers of the language are the very old people. For example, Yaku language in Ethiopia. 5) Extinct languages: languages which have 'already died'. It is because there are no more speakers of the languages.
Furthermore, in reference to bilingualism and its close relation to LS stages, Aljohani (2016) explains that, within a community, there is a precise system for the utilization of 'habitual language' in communication. According to her, this system requires different 'instruments' to measure the 'degree of bilingualism' with the relevant sociological dimensions. Aljohani further explains that the 'degree of bilingualism' is recognized automatically through proficiency and 'intact' grammatical levels, while the 'stage of bilingualism' and LS requires investigation with its functionality.
Similarly, Agyekum (2010) discussed LS stages in Ghana, i.e. the shift from Ghanaian language to English. He states that the major conditions for a LS are bilingualism, multilingualism, 'language contact' and 'language diffusion'. As, according to him, 'language contact' is a prerequisite for LS. Agyekum maintains that when two or more languages operate 'simultaneously' in one society for a long period, one language group may be pressured to 'abandon' their language and use another's language. He stresses that, if one language is eventually replaced by a new one, then 'language death' occurs. The author states that LS is normally a 'down-totop' approach. In other words, it is usually a lower-status linguistic group that shifts to a higher-status linguistic group and not the reverse. The superior language is associated with status, prestige and social success and wider context of usage. The dominant group, the author explains, has little or no incentive and motivation to adopt the language of a minority. This situation, according to Agyekum is prevalent in Ghana, where most people shift to English going through stages, as shown in Figure 1:

Types of LS Research
A number of studies have addressed the topic of LS, both in the Middle East and elsewhere. Based on the studies found, we can classify LS studies into three patterns; the first one occurs by moving to a new community, mostly immigrants moving to foreign countries for political or economic reasons, the second pattern occurs within a single society, as a result of the different ethnicities living within the same community, as for the third pattern, LS happens as a result of a colonizing more powerful entity. The studies found discussing these three patterns of LS are detailed below: As for the first pattern, it deals mostly with LS occurring among immigrants who move to a different country in search for better life opportunities. Gomaa (2011), for example, explored LS of Egyptians in Durham, United Kingdom. While, Anderson (2012) addressed the first language loss in Spanish-speaking children in USA. Anderson (2014) also examined LS in Okinawa, Japan, while Abtahian and Quinn (2017) explored the reality of LS and linguistic insecurity in USA. Also, Bocale (2019) examined the situation of LS and language revival in Crimea.
Moreover, the same LS pattern can be observed not only among the western world, as mentioned above, but also in the diversity of immigrants who settled in Arabic countries, for example, in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Habtoor (2012), for instance, addressed LS among second generation Tigrinya-speaking Eritrean immigrants in Saudi Arabia. While Tawalbeh, Dagamseh, and Al-Matrafi (2013) explored LS among Saudi Hausa-speakers in Mecca, Saudi Arabia. More importantly, the most common findings of these studies show that moving to a new community leads to LS and that this phenomenon is especially evident among the children of immigrant families.

Monolingual Language A Bilingual
Languages A&B

Monolingual
Language B

Death of language A
Furthermore, Suleiman (2003) argues that despite the political and social differences among people in the Arab world, both the Arabic language and the religion of Islam are considered as identity markers that unite Arabs. Hence, according to him, whenever religious differences occurred, the common language was used to bond the people, and where there was a difference in language, Islam was used as a marker of identity. An example he mentions, in some Arab countries such as Syria and Lebanon, where Christian Arabs make up a considerable percentage of the population, language serves as a significant marker of national identity.  Mugaddam, 2006). Such researchers believe that linguistic and cultural changes do not happen suddenly. It is believed to be the product of the interaction of sociolinguistic, cultural, and affective variables that work together to affect one's use of a language over another (Al-Khatib and Al-Ali, 2010).
In his study on LS and maintenance among the Armenians who settled in Jordan over 100 years ago, Al-Khatib (2001) concluded that they use the Arabic language in most social domains. A very small number, however, are still using Armenian in very restricted situations. Mugaddam (2006) also investigated the process of LS and maintenance among immigrants residing in Khartoum, Sudan. The language that was addressed in that study was the Nubian Language, one of the languages spoken in the Nuba Mountains located the south of Sudan. He concluded that these immigrants have shifted towards the use of Arabic in most communication domains, and that little is being done by the community to preserve their native tongues.
In addition, Al-Khatib and Al-Ali (2010) investigated the level of language and cultural shift among the Kurds of Jordan. Through their study, the authors attempted to highlight the sociodemographic factors that are causing that shift. The authors concluded that Arabic is used mainly in most social domains. However, they found that the Kurdish language was used in very restricted situations and by a very small number of people, particularly the elderly. The researchers proved that the Kurds of Jordan are actually experiencing a gradual shift toward Arabic, a shift which, according to them, may lead to ethnic language loss.
Al-Jumaily (2015) tackled the problem of heritage LS among the Arab immigrants' children living in the Netherlands. The author tried to explain the process of language loss and maintenance. By his study, the author aimed at investigating the validity of the common statement among researchers and scholars, which states that: 'if children become fluent in L2, L1 consequently declines'. Accordingly, Al-Jumaily attempted to explore whose responsibility the heritage language maintenance is, parents, schools, politicians, Arabic governments, or the Arab communities? The author discusses that, it is clear as children socialize with a wider circle outside the family, that circle begins to force the children, without being aware, to make the shift. The study concluded that worldwide, immigrant Arab children are encouraged to speak more than one language from the time they are born because bilingualism and multilingualism are looked at as 'true assets'. Consequently, Al-Jumaily warns that the children's sense of personal identity and culture are at risk if they are not given the opportunity to learn their parents' language(s). The author further stresses that, as a result, on a national and global level, the opportunity to 'evolve' into a truly multicultural society may be comprised. He explains that, although parents make serious efforts to ensure that children maintain the home language, the results are not completely positive unless children are willing to.
Moreover, Dweik and Al-Refa'i (2015) conducted a study to investigate the sociolinguistic background of the Assyrians of Jordan. It also attempted to explore the domains of use of Syriac and Arabic. They concluded that the Assyrians of Jordan were witnessing a shift from their ethnic language (Syriac) towards the majority language (Arabic). The community, the authors explain, 'consciously' placed more importance on Arabic which enabled them to be more 'assimilated' into 'mainstream' society. According to the authors, the assimilation was driven by a variety of factors, such as seeking security in the society. Furthermore, the findings of the study proved that, the Assyrians of Jordan were found to be using Arabic in almost all domains, whereas, Syriac was still minimally used in specific domains, such as, at home (with family members) and at church. This shift, the authors explained, was the result of historical, economic, demographic, linguistic, and 'generational distance'.
Abdelhadi (2017) asserts that it has never been an easy task for Arab immigrants and their children to maintain Arabic, especially under the linguistic and cultural pressures of the English language. According to the author, the majority of community languages 'lose ground' to English and adopt it in several domains in everyday life, and this, he maintains, is a sign of LS. Additionally, Abdelhadi explains that this situation is most likely predictable in English-speaking countries such as Australia, New Zealand, England, and the USA, where English is a dominant and the more prestigious language. As a result of that, the author stresses that, the maintenance of community languages remains a major concern for immigrant families, as well as linguists, educators, and language activists. Such entities, Abdelhadi maintains, feel the pressing need to support and maintain such 'threatened' languages for the following generations.
In his study, Habtoor (2012) addressed the language maintenance and LS among the young Tigrinya-speaking Eritrean immigrants in Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. He applied his study to the students in the Eritrean International School in Riyadh. The findings of the study showed that students had a limited ability to read, write, understand, speak, or even orally translate Arabic into Tigrinya, and vice-versa. In comparing their proficiency level in both Tigrinya and Arabic languages; it is found that they have a lower proficiency in Tigrinya than in Arabic. The researcher found that the use of Tigrinya is seemingly decreasing, and the use of Arabic is increasing among the sample students. Consequently, Habtoor asserts that the study shows evidence that secondgeneration Tigrinya teenagers' proficiency is shifting toward Arabic, rather than maintaining the native language.
Similarly, Tawalbeh et al. (2013) presented a study on language maintenance and shift among Saudi Hausa immigrants who live in Mecca, to explore their level of use of both the Hausa and Arabic languages in different social domains. The authors assert that immigrants usually face two conflicting wants; the want to be involved within their host community, and the want to preserve their language as part of their identity and heritage. Enhancing the first one, they believe, may lead immigrants, through generations, to lose proficiency in their ethnic language and ultimately shift towards the dominant language, whereas enforcing the second one may lead to language maintenance. The findings of the study show that Saudi Hausa people are now using Arabic in almost all their communications, and that there is no evidence of language maintenance, but in contrast, they have limited ability in Hausa language skills. The results of the study also suggest that the fast shift among Saudi Hausa towards the Arabic language is attributed to religious and socio-economic factors.
Moreover, as mentioned before, code-switching is considered by some linguists not only as closely connected to LS but more importantly as a precursor to LS, since it relies on proficient mastery of two or more languages and high bilingual abilities (Holmes & Wilson, 2017). In relation to that, some studies conducted in Saudi Arabia have focused on this wide-spreading phenomenon. Omar and Ilyas (2018), for example, maintained that, in the past few years, code-switching between Arabic and English marks a significant linguistic change in the use of Arabic in Saudi Arabia. In their investigation, Omar and Ilyas focused on describing the attitude of the Saudi academia (the English language instructors and English major students) towards code-switching between English and Arabic. Omar and Ilyas explain that, although any kind of language change is an inevitable process in almost every world language, it has always been 'resisted' in Saudi Arabia. This resistance, they explain, was mostly due to national identity and religious factors. They examined the perceptions of academia towards the use of varying languages and the attitude that resulted from those perceptions. The study was carried out on a sample size of 10 instructors and 40 students, taken from four universities in the Riyadh region of Saudi Arabia. In order to collect data, the researchers used focus group and interview methods. The collected transcripts were analyzed using a content analysis technique. Findings indicated that there was a close relationship between education and age on one side and the acceptability of code-switching on the other. Positive attitudes towards codeswitching were found among the younger participants in their tertiary level of education. The results also revealed that such an attitude affected learners' academic performance since the learner's attitude towards each language contributed to their learning and knowledge acquisition.
Additionally, Alluhaybi (2019) conducted a study investigating the linguistic phenomenon of code-switching among Saudi students who can speak both Arabic and English fluently. The author examined the most common type to be code switched as well as the validity of the 'equivalence of structural constraint'. Moreover, the study shows the impact on the behavior of speakers when they are engaged in a group discussion. The study concluded that most of the switches occurred 'intrasententially' (where the switching occurs within a sentence), more specifically single nouns were the most code-switched syntactic category in all groups. Interestingly, the researcher found that engaging in group discussions increased the likelihood of more frequent code-switching. According to him, this has been the case among both 'monodialectal' and 'bidialectal' speakers. Moreover, the data show that both groups 'violated' the equivalence of structure constraint. In both groups, this violation occurred in ordering morphemes in the clause. Alluhaybi explained that when participants produced sentences, they only paid attention to Arabic grammar. In other words, Arabic served as the 'matrix language' in every single situation, while English served as the embedded one. The major difference between the two groups appears in the way they deal with phonemes that do not exist in Arabic. According to Alluhaybi, 'monodialectals' substituted those phonemes with the closest ones to them in Arabic, whereas 'biadialectals' integrated them phonologically into Arabic.
In conclusion, the literature review above aimed to shed light on some various aspects of the Language Shift phenomenon, with some closer focus on related concepts, such as; the historical development of the concept, the factors affecting it, the domains and stages of LS, types of LS research, the relationship between language and identity, the theory of ethno-linguistic vitality (EV), and language attitudes. In addition, a review of recent studies on LS in general, and in the Arab world more specifically was also provided. The writer believes that such a field of research is significant and useful due to the fact that our personal, social and national identities are usually communicated and interpreted through language, and a shift in one's language can definitely contribute to an unintentional cultural merge or loss of original identity.