Abstract
The Arabic writing system lacks five phonemes commonly found in foreign names: پ (p), ڤ (v), ژ (zh), چ (ch), and گ (g). This study investigates the historical presence of three of these sounds — ژ, چ, and گ — in Arabic dialects, arguing that they are native yet absent from formal orthography. Using a descriptive-analytical approach, the research reviews linguistic texts and dialectal evidence, proposing the adoption of Persian-script equivalents to restore phonetic accuracy in Arabic writing. The study distinguishes between necessary integration (ژ, چ, گ) and acceptable substitutions (پ → ب, ڤ → ف) based on phonetic similarity and its usage. It concludes that integrating these symbols would resolve transliteration inconsistencies and support more precise communication, especially in writing proper nouns. The proposed solution respects the integrity of Standard Arabic while enhancing its adaptability to modern linguistic demands.
Keywords: missing letters, foreign words, colloquial dialects, Arabic alphabet.
Extended summary
Introduction
There are five phonemes missing from the Arabic alphabet. Three of these are pronounced in various Arabic dialects but were historically absent from the script. Early Arab writers substituted them when encountering these sounds in foreign proper names. The fourth and fifth phonemes have consistently been replaced across eras, with no notable dispute. This study focuses on reviving the three phonemes still present in speech but neglected in writing. Their incorporation into the Arabic script is not a case of introducing foreign sounds; rather, it represents a necessary restoration of authentically Arabic phonemes that require accurate orthographic representation.
The primary aim is to standardize the transcription of foreign proper names by adopting a unified system that reflects reality both phonetically and orthographically. The research addresses several key questions:
How have Arab scholars historically dealt with absent phonemes?
What is the relationship between this issue and Arabicization?
Does the Arabic alphabet require expansion?
How can inconsistencies in transcribing these sounds be resolved?
This investigation seeks not only to answer these questions but also to highlight the broader significance of the issue. If successful, this proposal could offer a consistent framework for writing foreign proper nouns, thus improving phonetic fidelity and linguistic clarity in Arabic script.
Materials & Methods
This study adopts a descriptive-analytical approach aimed at comprehensively examining the issue before extracting meaningful conclusions. The primary topics explored include:
Phonetic variation across languages
Arabic as the ancestral Semitic language
Orthographic inconsistency in writing missing phonemes
Evidence of these phonemes in modern Arabic usage
Recent proposals for integrating missing phonemes
Several Arab linguists and researchers have addressed the challenges of representing foreign phonemes within Arabic script, suggesting their inclusion into the alphabet. Notably, Hamid Al-Hashimi discussed this issue in his 2010 article “The Problem of Foreign Letters in Arabic” on Elaph.com. He highlighted widespread inconsistency across Arab nations and the absence of a standardized mechanism. He argued that the difficulty stems from the phonemes' absence from the Arabic system and a lack of consensus on suitable equivalents—posing a barrier to comprehension, particularly for readers with limited educational exposure. He cited four variant spellings of “Google” in Arabic as an illustrative case.
Another contribution came from Adel Salem in his 2009 article “Towards Developing and Modernizing Arabic,” published on adelsalem.com. Salem proposed adding two letters—“G” and “V”—to the Arabic alphabet. He justified the proposal on two grounds: enriching the language’s expressive capacity and enabling more accurate transcription of modern non-Arabic names.
Research findings
Inconsistency in Representing Non-Standard Phonemes in Contemporary Arabic Writing
Writing cannot fully represent speech; rather, it does so relatively, with varying levels of accuracy depending on the language. This section presents how each of the absent phonemes is currently rendered in modern Arabic, highlighting substantial inconsistency:
Triple-dot Jim (چ): Commonly transcribed as “تش” or “ش”.
Examples: “Modern linguistic schools such as the Chomsky (تشومسكي) school.” (Khaghani Esfahani, 2018, p.16.) — “Manchester City (مانشستر سيتي) showers Swansea’s net with five goals.” (RT Arabic (Russia Today).
Persian Gaf (گ): Rendered as “غ”, “ج”, or “ك”.
Examples: “Wittgenstein (ویتغنشتاین) argues that language is self-evident and indefinable.” (Khaghani Esfahani, 2018, p.17.) — “Names such as Victor Hugo (هوجو), Lamartine, and De Musset.” (Khorsha, 2002, p.67.) — “Published by Luzac Library in London in England (إنكلترة).” (Faroukh, 1981, Vol.1, p.24.)
Voiced fricative Jim (ژ): Typically transcribed as “ج”.
Example: “Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (أحمدي نجاد), an Iranian politician from a humble background.” (Al Jazeera Encyclopedia.)
Triple-dot Fa (ڤ): Represented as “ف”.
Example: “Venice (فينيسيا) is one of the cities of Italy.” (Meraj Gasht Travel & Tourism Agency Website.)
Triple-dot Ba (پ): Written as “ب” or “ف”.
Examples: “Apollo (أبولو) group, a literary collective.” (Khorsha, 2002, p.140.) — “The second session of the Intellectual Property and Innovators Guide program to be held in Singapore (سنغافورة).” (Emirates News Agency (WAM).)
Discussion of Results & Conclusion
This study highlights the underacknowledged Arabic origins of three phonemes— triple-dot Zay (ژ), Persian Kaf (گ), and triple-dot Jim (چ)— which, despite their presence in classical pronunciation, remain absent from standard orthography. Linguistic texts reference them, yet no proposal has addressed their formal inclusion.
It is reasonable for Arabic to adopt script forms from Persian, a language with shared phonetic and orthographic features. Using these phonemes to transcribe non-Arabic proper names ensures phonetic fidelity, especially when translation is infeasible. Likewise, Arabic names derived from these sounds—common in Iraqi dialects—should retain their phonetic spelling. Replacing “چاسب” with “جاسب” or “گاصد” with “كاصد” ignores their true linguistic roots.
Phonetic recommendations include:
(ڤ) transcribed as Fa, due to shared articulation.
(پ) ideally as Ba, to avoid confusion with Fa.
(ژ) written as Jim if pronounced softly, otherwise in Persian form (ژ).
(g) represented by Persian Kaf (گ).
(چ) transcribed using Persian (چ) rather than compound forms.
Arabic lacks only three phonemes in writing, unlike other languages that face broader gaps. To address this, technology developers are encouraged to integrate these characters into Arabic keyboards—a step toward resolving longstanding inconsistencies.
Main Subjects
The Sources and References:
Books
Journals
Websites
)