journal of Language Studies

Taking into account the dimensions of language learning as well as the
contexts, which adapt to their forms of dependence in communication
or in the promotion of ways of acquiring knowledge, extends to
include all cognitive pathways that the learner can activate in the
processes of the possession of all the linguistic knowledge for one or
more languages.
It seems that taking language learning into account according to
linguistic pluralism and the cultural diversity, which characterizes
certain contexts, leads us to seek the limits of the interaction between
the cultural aspect structuring linguistic specificity and the cognitive
requirement, in which we understand the constants of the regularity of
its elements and their mental functioning. This could be of great
importance in our reflection on "bilingualism", and the cognitive
strategies that bilinguals activate to manage the variances and / or
similarities characterizing the two linguistic systems and the methods
of treatment and representation (implicit or explicit) activated in their
possession.

This paper examines the controversial disagreement among schools
of Arabic syntax; according to which, the syntactic components and
rules classified and investigated thoroughly. The research tries to
answer the following questions: What is meant by controversial
disagreement on syntax? And what are the reasons behind it? What
is the true nature of syntax schools? What are their types? What are
the negative and positive impacts of that controversial
disagreement? The paper traces back the controversial disagreement
on Arabic syntax and defines its advantages. There are several
previous studies dealing with this question, however; this research
paper examines the linguistic and terminological aspects of that
disagreement among schools of Basrah, Kufa, Baghdad, Andalusia,
and Egypt. Despite their disagreement, the syntax schools have one
aim: serving the syntax and keeping it flawless. Through this paper,
it is attempted to present all these aspects. It concludes and confirms
that disagreement on syntax among grammarians is a normal issue,
which confirms the fact that syntax is flawlessness. Thus, one can
say that having different viewpoints does not necessarily harm
syntax; however, it makes it more solid and flawless. Furthermore,
the disagreement among the syntax schools has positive and
negative impacts in enriching Arabic syntax.