(Re)Writing the Middle East: Tension, Engagement, and Rhetorical Translanguaging

Oct 15, 2026

(Re)Writing the Middle East examines tension and engagement in Middle Eastern writing classrooms through rhetorical and composition perspectives. It argues that “Middle East” is a constructed category shaped by distinct historical, economic, and linguistic trajectories, intensified by superdiversity, colonial/postcolonial legacies, and globalization-driven translanguaging. The discussion links regional political unrest and conflict to critical language pedagogy and postdigital rhetorics, while outlining challenges to Western models in multilingual higher education contexts, including AUB’s linguistic and religious diversity.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages6

Reading Time15 min

AccessFree to download

Framing the Middle East as a constructed category

Superdiversity and multilingualism

Tensions in the region and classroom implications

Critical language pedagogy and postdigital rhetorics

Higher education models and writing studies

Limits of Western pedagogical assumptions

ESL/EFL and culturally relevant textbook efforts

Pages Apart and learning outcomes

(Re)Writing the Middle East: Tension, Engagement, and Rhetorical Translanguaging Emma Moghabghab What it mdependseaannsatowftuelalchot and research writing in the Middle East today on what one supposes the Middle East to be. The countries that make up the Middle East have intersecting though distinct and internally complex historical, economic, and linguistic histories. As I have touched on elsewhere (Moghabghab et al.), the “Middle East” itself is a construct that we should use with unease given the plurality of these histories (121).1 Characterized by what Vertovec termed “superdiversity,” the countries of the Middle East include not only diversity of societies but also great diversity within the groups that constitute these societies (Hodges et al. 49) . Disparate colonial histories and postcolonial legacies,2 the religious and socio-political positioning of Arabic as a regional language,3 and the influences of globalization and translanguaging create nuanced and multilayered multilingualisms that challenge any articulation of overarching models and methods for the teaching and research of writing in the region. At the same time, the Middle East is currently in the throes of economic and political unrest combined with violence and interspersed war in several countries; tensions that have marked the region for many years and are often reflected in the work of the region’s writing teachers and scholars. Some of these include the enduring trauma in countries like Lebanon, in particular after the August 4, 2020 explosion and the country’s ongoing complete economic collapse; the continuing Israeli-Palestinian conflict; the wars in Syria and Yemen; the multiple refugee crises; negotiating regional and international political relations between the various countries of the Gulf; and navigating international affairs with/in the region, to name but a few. In this ecology, the writing classroom and the discipline of rhetoric and composition become potential discursive spaces where these tensions are played out and encountered critically. As teachers and researchers of writing adapt their rhetoric and practices to create discourse communities using critical language pedagogiesand postdigital rhetorics, they engage with the past and present ideological, cultural, economic, and political tensions ofthe region. The earliest institutions of higher learning adopting an American liberal arts curriculum in the region date back to the middle of the 19th century. The American University of Beirut, in Lebanon, was originally founded as Syrian Protestant College in 1866 and adopted a liberal arts model in the early 20th century. In recent years, older models have been coupled with the proliferation of English-medium universities and international branch campuses in numer Composition Studies 49.3 (2021): 165–170 ous Middle Eastern countries, particularly in the Arabian Gulf. However, the American “model” for writing studies does not integrate seamlessly into local cultures and communities.4 Even terms like “English as a Second or Foreign Language” or “bilingualism” are problematized in this context where multilingual speakers negotiate varied linguistic backgrounds with competing nationalist and religious ideologies and postcolonial perceptions about the “prestige”of speaking a foreign language.5 For instance, at the American University of Beirut, a French-language educated Catholic student and an Arabic-language educated Shia Muslim student come not only at English, but also at a shared Standard Arabic (Fus’ha), with significantly different language attitudes because of their different religious and communal backgrounds. As representative of regional diversity, the Lebanese example highlights the ever-increasing need for focused scholarship on writing studies, pedagogy, and writing centers in the Middle East also noted in Arnold et al. (11) . More importantly, such scholarship needs to emerge directly from the research, expertise,

FAQs

Why does the article treat “Middle East” as an uneasy construct?

Because the region’s countries share intersecting but internally complex historical, economic, and linguistic histories, making any single overarching model problematic.

How do political violence and instability connect to writing instruction?

The text argues that writing classrooms can function as discursive spaces where longstanding tensions are critically played out and encountered through teaching and research practices.

What challenges arise when applying U.S.-based writing studies in Middle Eastern classrooms?

The value and applicability of Western pedagogical models are questioned and renegotiated, especially because multilingual students’ language learning does not fit conventional ESL/EFL definitions used in Western writing scholarship.

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by WPS_1790064749