Learning Arabic in Place: Engaging With the City to Enhance Study Abroad Programs

The driver burst into laughter and, although he did not mean to be unkind, this reaction triggered in me great discouragement as much as frustration.

Like many Arabic learners, I was speaking the Arabic of textbooks, which cannot but sound funny at the ears of local native speakers in everyday life contexts.

This anecdote is familiar to many students of Arabic arriving to an Arabic-speaking country and represents a well-documented aspect of study abroad (SA) studies: the central role of social interaction in shaping language learning experiences abroad.

Indeed, research on SA programs has long focused on conversational encounters and oral fluency development through contact with native speakers, highlighting the benefits of learning immersed into the social context of the target language (Kinginger, 2011).

These dimensions are essential. Yet, looking back to my first Arabic learning experience in Egypt, I have started reflecting on another central element that powerfully shapes the learning experience of a SA program: the place itself.

The city starts speaking to us long before we consciously realize it. From the very first moments of a SA experience, streets, signs, sounds and everyday visual elements quietly shape how we encounter the language and they accompany us throughout the learning journey. Rather than serving as a passive background, the city gradually becomes an active protagonist: a space full of opportunities for real, authentic and dynamic language learning.

This realization invites an important shift in how we think about immersion.

What if immersion went beyond conversations with people and classroom walls?

What if we viewed the entire city as a learning environment, a living, breathing classroom where language is visible everywhere, embedded in public space, constantly inviting learners to observe, interpret and make meaning?

In this blog post, I share some reflections inspired by these questions, drawing on assignments that I carried out during the Fall semester 2025 in the TAFL master’s program at AUC.

Place as a learning space

Undoubtedly, language learning abroad does not happen only in classrooms or conversations. The different spaces of the city become then active learning environments rich of a variety of linguistic, cultural and symbolic meaning (Pennycook, 2010; Vygotsky, 1978; Sobel, 2004).

In Arabic SA contexts especially, place plays a decisive role. Cities like Cairo, Amman, Rabat, or Tunis confront learners with linguistic realities that challenge classroom more rigid norms: flowing variation between Modern Standard Arabic and spoken dialects, multilingual signage, rich script diversity and various culturally embedded expressions, among others. These encounters can push learners to negotiate meaning continuously, sharpening awareness, curiosity and interpretive skills. This can carry a huge potential for Arabic language education in SA context.

Seeing place as a learning space means recognizing that:

• Language is encountered visually as well as orally
• Meaning is constructed through context, location and audience
• Learning continues beyond scheduled class time, often incidentally and informally. If consciously noticed, this can greatly reinforce the learning process.[1]

Looking at Place-Based Education

Research across Education and Applied Linguistics increasingly shows that learning is most effective when it is grounded in the local environment and community.

Notably, Place-Based Education (PBE) views place not as a backdrop, but as the foundation of meaningful learning, emphasizing experiential, contextual and community-based approaches (Sobel, 2004; Gruenewald, 2003). In language education, this reinforces the importance of context in meaning-making and language use (Kramsch, 1993).

As Holmes (1972) notes, “The key to understanding language in context is to start not with language, but with context” (as cited in Kramsch, 1993, p. 34).

Importantly, place-based learning can take multiple forms. Granit-Dgani (2021) identifies five complementary ways of learning with place: teaching and learning about the place, learning in place, study of the place, learning from the place and learning for the sake of place (as cited in Lomicka Anderson et al., 2025, p. 6). Together, these dimensions highlight how the environment can function simultaneously as content, context, resource and purpose for learning, which represents a powerful framework for SA programs.

On this basis, we can draw attention to the ‘Spatial Turn’, which highlights how language and literacy learning happens across multiple interconnected spaces, encouraging learners to critically engage with the texts, interactions and semiotic resources available in the physical and digital surrounding environments (Mills, 2016; Kramsch, 2018; Lam & Warriner, 2012, as cited in Lozano et al., 2020, p. 19).

As Lomicka Anderson et al. (2025) argue: “The theorizing of place creates a counterpoint, offering an opportunity to teach languages as they are used, felt, experienced, and shared in concrete locations, and emphasizes the integration of learners' experiences with their local communities and linguacultures” (p. 6).

For SA programs, these emerging approaches invite language educators to consider how to intentionally integrate the surrounding environment into learning design, treating the city itself as a living classroom rather than a passive setting.

The Linguistic Landscape: One way the city can teach

During my TAFL studies in the Fall semester, I encountered research on linguistic landscape (LL), which led me to reflect on how integrating LL-based activities in the curriculum can become a powerful tool to revalue the role of place in SA programs.

Linguistic Landscape (LL) was first defined by Landry and Bourhis (1997) as: “The language of public road signs, advertising billboards, street names, place names, commercial shop signs, and public signs on government buildings combines to form the linguistic landscape of a given territory, region or urban agglomeration” (p. 25). This foundational definition sparked the field’s rapid growth, expanding to include graffiti, mobile and digital signs, further evolving leading to more research and to the launch of a journal entirely dedicated to Linguistic Landscape (Gorter & Cenoz, 2015).[2]

In multilingual cities such as Cairo, these signs form what has been described as a multilingual cityscape, where Modern Standard Arabic, dialect, and other languages coexist, overlap, or are strategically excluded, reflecting social meanings, identities, power relations and economic dynamics (Shohamy & Gorter, 2009; Blommaert, 2013; Gorter & Cenoz, 2015).

Research shows that LL can function as a form of authentic input, supporting learners’ pragmatic competence and sociolinguistic awareness (Cenoz & Gorter, 2008). By analyzing where signs appear, which varieties are chosen and who they seem to address, learners develop critical language awareness while making sense of multilingualism and language ideologies in real space, deepening the learning process at multiple levels (Gorter et al., 2021).

On the specific case of LL as a pedagogical tool for Arabic learning, you can read this previous blog post, “Learning Arabic from Cairo’s Streets” on Aralects, based on a small case study of LL items that I have conducted in Mohamed Mahmoud Street in Downtown Cairo.

Designing activities to learn in the city

Recognizing the pedagogical value of place opens new possibilities for study abroad program design. Integrating the place in classroom activities can be simple yet transformative and below a few suggestions:

• Guided observation walks focused on language use in specific neighbourhoods
• Photo-based reflection assignments connecting language and context
• Classroom discussions linking public signs to themes of identity, power and audience
• Comparative tasks among street signs and language choice that boost learners’ critical awareness

To explore the diverse applications of LL in language classrooms, we can refer to recent collections, such as Language Teaching in the Linguistic Landscape: Mobilizing Pedagogy in Public Space (Malinowski et al., Eds., 2020), that provide a comprehensive overview of studies, including contemporary trends integrating technology and virtual environments into LL-based language learning.

Revaluing the role of place in Arabic Study Abroad

"As I go to New Cairo next semester to take classes that will complete my degree, I feel a mix of disappointment and excitement. I am very attached to Downtown […] I will continue to live Downtown, and practice with the handball team. Though my daily life will certainly change, I am sure that I will continue speaking Arabic as much as possible!" (Martin, 2025).

As one of the ALIN students shared in his reflections to AUC Today at the end of his program in Downtown, the role of place in shaping the learning experience in a SA program, and the attachment learners can develop, becomes evident.

As I have reflected throughout this blog post, learning a language abroad is not only about speaking with people; it is also about learning with and in the city, forming connections and attachments to it. The everyday social environment can define and enrich the experience, turning the city into a central protagonist, which represents an endless source of input, motivation and engagement.

Recognizing this potential can be the starting point for creatively designing new activities, re-centering curricula around the city, opening classroom walls to the surrounding environment and exposing learners to authentic linguistic and cultural experiences. Research in this direction in Arabic contexts, looking at how teachers guide learners and how tasks can be adapted for different levels, could offer original insights to help enhance Arabic SA programs, making them transformative experiences with long-lasting effects at a multitude of levels. 

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Qatar Foundation International (QFI). While QFI reviews guest contributions for clarity and to ensure the content is valuable for our audience, the accuracy and completeness of the information are the responsibility of the author.

References

• Blommaert, J. (2013). Ethnography, superdiversity and linguistic landscapes: Chronicles of complexity. Multilingual Matters.
• Cenoz, J., & Gorter, D. (2008). The linguistic landscape as an additional source of input in second language acquisition. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 46(3), 267–287. https://doi.org/10.1515/IRAL.2008.012
• Gorter, D., & Cenoz, J. (2015). Linguistic landscape and multilingualism. In J. Cenoz, D. Gorter, & S. May (Eds.), Language awareness and multilingualism (Encyclopedia of Language and Education). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02325-0_27-1
• Gorter, D., Cenoz, J., & van der Worp, K. (2021). The linguistic landscape as a resource for language learning and raising language awareness. Journal of Spanish Language Teaching, 8(2), 161–181. https://doi.org/10.1080/23247797.2021.2014029
• Gruenewald, D. A. (2003). The best of both worlds: A critical pedagogy of place. Educational Researcher, 32(4), 3–12.
• Kinginger, C. (2011). Enhancing language learning in study abroad. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 31, 58–73. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190511000031
• Kramsch, C. (1993). Context and culture in language teaching. Oxford University Press.
• Landry, R., & Bourhis, R. Y. (1997). Linguistic landscape and ethnolinguistic vitality. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 16, 23–49.
• Lomicka Anderson, L., Klimanova, L., Abdennebi, M., & Bain, L. (2025). Perceptions of place-based pedagogies in language education through the lens of K–16 teachers. Foreign Language Annals. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1111/flan.70027
• Lozano, M. E., Jiménez-Caicedo, J. P., & Abraham, L. B. (2020). Linguistic landscape projects in language teaching: Opportunities for critical language learning beyond the classroom. In D. Malinowski, H. H. Maxim, & S. Dubreil (Eds.), Language teaching in the linguistic landscape (pp. 17–42). Springer.
• Malinowski, D., Dubreil, S., & Maxim, H. H. (Eds.). (2020). Language teaching in the linguistic landscape: Mobilizing pedagogy in public space. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-55761-4
• Martin, E. (2025, February 12). Learning Arabic, living Egypt. AUC Today. https://auctoday.com/2025/02/12/learning-arabic-living-egypt/
• Pennycook, A. (2010). Language as a local practice. Routledge.
• Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 129–158. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/11.2.129
• Shohamy, E., & Gorter, D. (Eds.). (2009). Linguistic landscape: Expanding the scenery. Routledge.
• Sobel, D. (2004). Place-based education: Connecting classrooms & communities. The Orion Society.
• Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.

Footnotes:

[1] Cf. Schmidt’s (1995) ‘Noticing Hypothesis’, according to which input becomes intake through the process of noticing with consciousness

[2] For an overview of publications on LL, see the open online bibliography hosted on Zotero (www.zotero.org/groups/linguistic_landscape_bibliography), as noted by Gorter and Cenoz (2015, p. 238).