Attributes of (L1) Role and Usage in the Teaching –Learning of (L2): A Case Study of Arabic as (L1) in the Teaching-Learning of English as a Foreign (L2)

The relationship between (L1) and (L2), in accordance with the available related literature, stands for a central motif , and the role and usage of (L1)in the teaching-learning of (L2) has been a subject of an ongoing controversy and debate , within the available related research, and among scholars , educators, and teachers. This condition of controversy and debate was confirmed by the available Abstract: The role and usage of (L1) in the teachinglearning of (L2) has been a controversial issue between supporters and opponents of such a role and usage, without reaching a settled conclusion, and without, as far as the researcher knows, defining the attributes, setting up limits and boundaries, providing a scope, and spotting any referential point, but rather approaching the issue in a general sense and an unbounded purview. Accordingly, the aim of this study was to investigate the attributes related to the role and usage of (L1) in the teachinglearning of (L2), and to explore the case of such role and usage in regard to Arabic as (L1) in the teachinglearning of English as a foreign (L2). To achieve the purpose of this study and to answer its questions, the researcher followed a qualitative analytical approach that was applied on the available related literature which was presented and arranged in an approximate chronological order. Findings of this study confirmed the existence of a state of debate and controversy dealing with the issue, and proposed this debate and uncertainty to be a direct side-effect to the absence of any endeavor to define those attributes that are related to such a role and usage of (L1) in the teaching-learning of (L2) ; this process of defining the attributes may act as a reference point and a beacon to which the attention of teachers, educators , and education planners can be anchored and be oriented towards; this process of anchoring and orientation can yield and ideal chance to exploit this role and usage as maximum as possible, and, on the other hand, may establish a middle area of understanding concerning the strong and weak points of both supporters and opponents so as to foster an important facet of development. In regard to the role and usage of Arabic as (L1) in the teaching and learning of English as a foreign (L2), findings of this study, and in accordance with the available related literature, indicate that the same state of controversy exists within an Arabic setting where English is taught and learnt as a foreign language, without also reaching a closing stage. In addition, findings of this study indicate that the role and usage of Arabic as (L1) in the teachinglearning of English as a foreign (L2) is allowable and admissible because of some justifying reasons and excusable rationales. Findings of this study also indicate that some Arabic teachers use Arabic as (L1) while teaching English as a foreign (L2) in a way to evade problematic teaching-learning situations, and as a direct response to the preferences of the students who, normally, prefer bilingual teachers. Findings of this study also indicate that any role and usage of (L1)-whether it is Arabic or any other native languagein the teaching-learning of (L2), though it is allowable, justifiable, and admissible, should be judicious, calculated, and limited in order not to negatively affect the authenticity and purity of the input and exposure of (L2). As a result, this study concludes that the attributes for the role and usage of (L1) in the teaching-learning of (L2) can be best described as to be utterly pragmatic, expedient, instrumental, and quite feasible. Accordingly, this study came up with various related recommendations.

; this controversy and debate also reflect two antithetical points of view between those some who take a positive-optimistic stand towards the role and usage of (L1) in the teachinglearning of (L2) ,on the one hand, on the grounds that this role and usage, to some extent, is unavoidable phenomenon because of some justifying reasons and conditions such as the differences between the linguistic systems of (L1) and (L2) , the setting whether(L2) is learnt or acquired as a foreign or a second language , the level of the student or the learner, and the environment and atmosphere of the teaching-learning process, and, on the other side, those some who base their negative-skeptical stand towards such a role and usage of (L1) in the teaching-learning of (L2)on the argument that the process of learning and acquisition of (L2) is centrally dependent on the purity, authenticity, level, volume ,scope, and extent of (L2) input and exposure; if this input and exposure be built on a wide range of role and usage of (L1), a distorted learning and acquisition process may be resulted in, which eventually means producing patterns of (L2) that are flavored with (L1) tastes and aromas, the thing that contradicts with the core and essence of learning and acquiring (L2) which should be , generally, oriented towards acquiring and producing approximately pure native -like , (L1)-free, and authentic patterns of (L2).
As far as the role and usage of Arabic as (L1) ,in the teaching-learning of English as a foreign (L2),is concerned, previous research confirmed that the state of debate and controversy is also still ongoing among supporters who take a positive-optimistic stand and those opponents who take a negativeskeptical stand in regard to the role and usage of Arabic as (L1) in the teaching-learning of English as a foreign (L2); the proximal area of this debate, as proposed by previous literature, is that the use of Arabic as (L1) in the teaching-learning of English as a foreign (L2) can be allowable and ,to some extent, justifiable because of various integrated reasons : Teaching English as a foreign (L2) to Arabic-speaking students and learners is not an easy task due to the fact that there are some differences between the linguistic systems of the two languages, the peculiarity of the Arabic setting in the sense that it is always tied up with varieties of variables such as cultural dimensions , the lack of the practical use of English outside classroom, the proficiency level of the learners and students, the attitudes and preferences of both teachers and students towards the only-English teaching and learning strategies , and the degree and level of influence of the Arabic linguistic system on those students and learners' linguistic repertoire , especially whenever there are hindering differences within the linguistic systems of both Arabic and English. This justifiable role and usage of Arabic as (L1) in the teaching-learning of English as a foreign (L2), on the other hand, is not hailed by those who take a negative -skeptical stand towards the a adoption of Arabic as (L1) in the teaching-learning of English as a foreign (L2),on the ground that this debatable and controversial role and usage of Arabic as (L1) can be damaging, to a great extent, to the amount of exposure and the purity of (L2)input which, in turn, can influence the whole learning and acquisition process of English as a foreign (L2). It is also notable, in this regard, that even those adherents to the role and usage of Arabic as (L1) in the teaching-learning of English as (L2), concede that this role and usage should be judicious, limited, and be conditioned to different variables such as students or learners' levels, learning environment, students or learners' preferences and attitudes, and the teachers' attitudes and preferences as well.
This study proposes that the state of the mentioned debate and controversy may be a direct side-effect of the absence of defining the attributes of this supposed role and usage of (L1) ; acknowledging such boundaries may help in orienting the attention of whom are concerned towards an established reference and beacon, and as a result providing more understanding on the issue. Accordingly, this study concludes , in line with previous related studies , that this role and usage of (L1) in the teachinglearning of (L2) can be best described as to be utterly pragmatic, expedient, instrumental, and quite feasible because of three reasons: first, even those adherents to the positive role and usage of (L1) in the teaching-learning of (L2), admit the fact that this role and usage is not absolute, but , on the contrary, it is bounded up with various variables and limitations such as the similarities and differences between the linguistic systems of (L1) and (L2), the students and learners' level -whether they are beginners or higher, the preferences and attitudes of both students and teachers, and after all the learning situation and classroom environment; second, those adherents of the positive role and usage of (L1) , as also revealed by previous literature, usually, resort to (L1) in the teaching-learning of (L2) as a strategy of evading problems with students and learners who normally prefer bilingual teaching and learning over an only-English teaching and learning ; third , those adherents to the positive role and usage of (L1), in reference to previous related literature, and as far as the researcher knows, have not been able to specify the exact level, circumstances , scope, extent, and the amount of this role and usage. As a result, it can be stated that the resort to (L1) may not be based on an empirical and theoretical climate, but rather on what is advantageous, practical, and, to some extent introspective, which, in turn, assures the proposal of this study to shed more light on such attributes and boundaries.

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
Although the role and usage of (L1) in the teaching-learning of (L2)has been approached by previous literature, the controversy hasn't yet reached a decisive conclusion ; this proposed role and usage has also been dealt with professedly and as a general banner without, as far as the researcher knows, investigating the attributes for it. Acknowledging defined attributes for such a role and usage of (L1) in the teaching-learning of (L2) may help in setting up a domain of reference which can act as a milestone towards exploiting such a role and usage of (L1) , and , then, reaching an ultimate benefit.
Arabic as (L1) in the teaching-learning of English as a foreign (L2) is also a problem-generating area throughout research due to the fact that such a role and usage is generally viewed as to be admissible and ,to some extent , justifiable as a result of the existence of varieties of legitimizing reasons and rationales , but, at the same time, without anchoring this admissibility and justifiability to a given referential attribute, which is an essential factor ,in the sense that it can steer the attention of teachers, educators, and scholars towards a defined beacon which may be able to decide the scope and volume of this role and usage which has not been come to a final conclusion. Some of the Arabic-speaking teachers of English as a foreign language, in accordance with the researchers' experience, resort to use Arabic as (L1) in the teaching-learning of English as a foreign (L2) as a way of evading problems that may arise due to the fact that a number of Arabic-speaking students prefer bilingual teaching and learning; in addition, some Arabic-speaking teachers may feel some kind of stigma if the use Arabic while teaching English because it may act as a judgment to their proficiency in English . This situation exists within the Arabic setting, as proposed by this study, because this supposed role and usage of Arabic, as (L1) in the teaching-learning of English as a foreign (L2), is approached in a general-instrumental sense without being anchored to a given referential attribute, nor, seemingly to an established empirical atmosphere.

Significance of the Study
Previous literature revealed an important demand for further research investigating the role and usage of (L1) in the teaching-learning of (L2), and a pressing need to define , specify, and spell out the attributes, boundaries, scope, timing ,and limitations of such a role and usage in order to meet the challenges and setbacks , and also to achieve the maximum benefit ; this was proposed by previous related literature: for example, Ghobadi, M., &Ghasemi, H. (2015: 245 ), stated that "Yet, there remain some challenges and obstacles for L1 use in language se. Suggestions are made as to how to address these challenges so that L2 pedagogy and use would benefit most from L1 use in language classrooms."Alrabah, S., Wu, S. H., Alotaibi, A. M., &Aldaihani, H. A. (2016: 8), concluded that "There is also a need to specify to teachers when to use L1 and when not to use it as a substitute for L2. This knowledge may be put to good use by EFL teachers who seek to create the right conditions in the classroom for successful language learning for their students."Alrabah, S., Wu, S. H., Alotaibi, A. M., &Aldaihani, H. A. (2016: 2), also added that "There is thus a need for more research to explore the potential benefits and drawbacks of L1 use on teaching and learning processes in a country where English is taught as a foreign language such as Kuwait." Debreli, E. (2016: 24), found that "less research has been conducted regarding the non-native L2 teachers' perceptions of when L1 use is required." As a result, one facet of the significance of this study is the fact that it is not just a continuation of previous research, but, on the contrary, proposes a different approach to investigate the role and usage of (L1) in the teaching-learning of (L2) by defining some of the related attributes that may help in The role and usage of Arabic as (L1) in the teaching-learning of English as (L2), as was proposed by previous related literature, may be justifiable and admissible to some teachers and educators , but it is also approached, within a similar methodology like the case is within the a available literature , in a general sense without specifying the attributes , the boundaries and the limits of this role and usage. some Arabic-native teachers of English as a foreign language , and based on the researchers' own experience as a teacher and lecturer of English since 1999, resort to Arabic as (L1) in teaching English as a method of evading problems that may arise with their students and learners who normally prefer bilingual approach that enhances much amount of Arabic ; in addition, some Arabic-native teachers of English as a foreign language , and based on the researchers' own experience, carry some kind of stigma and guilt whenever they switch to Arabic while teaching English due to the fact that this kind of switching may be considered as a negative indicator of their proficiency and capabilities towards teaching English , which is an attribute no teacher is willing to have. This problematic and conflict-producing state , this study proposes , is an outcome of the inadequacy throughout the available related literature to specify a specific definition for the attributes , boundaries, scope, timing ,and limitations of such a role and usage for Arabic. Accordingly , another facet of the significance of this study is that it can orient the attention of Arabic -native teachers of English as a foreign language towards better understanding through establishing a well-referenced and defined approach in regard to teaching English as a foreign language.
Moreover , and as far as the researcher knows, studies like this one, approaching the attributes related to the role and usage of (L1) in the teachinglearning of (L2), are very rare, which in turn , adds an adequate facet to its significance.

LITERATURE REVIEW
The following review of the available related literature, which is anchored to the aim and questions of this study, is divided into three sections: the first section presents a panoramic and chronological account of the debate related to the role and usage of (L1) in the teaching-learning of (L2); the second and the third sections of this literature review present two antithetical accounts for those who hold a positive-optimistic stand in regard to the role and usage of (L1) in the teaching-learning of (L2), and those who conversely hold a negative-pessimistic stand towards the same role and usage ; while the third section of this review establishes an account of the rationale, trends , and outlook towards the role and usage of Arabic as (L1) in the teaching-learning of English as a foreign (L2): 3.1. The state of debate and controversy in regard to role and Usage of (L1) in the teachinglearning of (L2).
The following review of the related literature acknowledged the state of debate and controversy in regard to the role and usage of (L1) in the teaching-learning of (L2): Machaal, B. (2012: 194), concluded that "The role of students' first language (L1) in foreign language (L2) classrooms has generated increasing debates in the field of the teaching of English as a foreign language (EFL)." Mart, Ç. T. (2013: 9), found that "The use of L1 (first language) in ESL classes has been debated for many years. There have been many arguments about the use of L1 whether it hinders or facilitates L2 (second language) learning. There is a widespread assumption that the use of L1 is not utilized in L2 learning; therefore, should be used as little as possible." Ghobadi Hamdallah, R. (1999: 294), stated that "With the advent of the communicative approach in language teaching which gives allowance for the use of L1 in certain situations and contexts, we believe that the taboo against the use of L1 in L2 and the rigid dogma of certain language teaching methods should be eased." To sum up, the previous review conceded the existence of debate and controversy about the role and usage of (L1) in the teaching-learning of (L2), which also exists within an Arabic setting; the argument whether (L1) hinders or facilitates the process of teaching-learning of (L2) is still ongoing, without reaching a considerable and settled conclusion, to the extent that further studies are needed to cast more understanding on the issue. As a result of this debate, the previous review pointed out a critical point within the Arabic setting, which the researcher believes, is common among some Arabic-speaking teachers who exhibit some kind of rift and contradiction between what they really perform in the classrooms and their attitudes, beliefs, and preferences about how Arabic should be enhanced. The previous review also revealed a demand that the adamant dogmatic stand against the use of (L1) in the teaching-learning of (L2) should be eased.

The positive stand towards role and Usage of (L1) in the teaching-learning of (L2).
The following review of the available related literature establishes an account of the points of view of those who take a positive-optimistic stand towards the role and usage of (L1) in the teaching-learning of (L2): , proposed that " the mother tongue can play a positive role rather than a negative one in L2 learning, depending on the similarity of the two languagesi.e. Some languages share words, "cognates", and may be have the same structure, and in this case, the advantage of using the mother tongue will be noticed."Meyer, H. , further explained that "L1 helps the learners to understand the context, L1 will make the students comfortable, once they acquire the structure of L2 with the help of L1, and they do not use L1 forever."Gomathi, B., &Kiruthika, P.
(2013: 26), also added "Learners realize that fluency in L1 is a stepping stone towards achieving fluency in L2. The mother tongue represents a powerful resource that can be used in a number of ways to enhance learning but that it must always be used in a principled way. L1 and L2 are the two banks of rivers of communication."Mart, Ç. T. (2013: 9), concluded that "Prohibiting the use of students' mother tongue in the classroom will not give them the opportunity to make a comparison between L1 and L2. , also added that "the teachers as a group could tell that using L1 can be a means of lowering their students' affective filters along with their feelings of inhibition and anxiety while learning the L2."Debreli, E.
(2016: 25,26,28), reflected the attitudes of teachers by stating that "L1 should be used in L2 classrooms, and they also mentioned that it was unavoidable. Many also emphasized the benefits of using L1 in L2 classrooms, "and that "L1 ban from classrooms decreased their and their students' motivation and made lessons -dull,‖ because "teachers in this study believed that learners learn quicker if L1 was used." Debreli, E. (2016: 27), further explained that "It is very common in language classrooms to see that our learners' errors become fossilized in time as a result of improperly learning, or learning incorrectly at the beginning. It is therefore a must to use L1 in instances when the topic is difficult or complex to teach and learn. -Debreli, E. (2016: 28), added that "Another reason for the teachers preferring L1 was that it was difficult for the teachers to -socialize‖ or -to tell jokes‖ in the classroom in L2 as their language proficiency was insufficient. " Debreli, E. (2016: 29), also explained that "the students in those classes complained about the new teacher's ban of L1, saying that their old teachers allowed the use of L1. Such occasions caused tensions between the students and the teachers, and caused -bad relationships. , also explained that "L2 learners consciously or subconsciously think in mother tongue and use L1 to facilitate L2 input and output and this is sometimes inevitable. So the learner's first language can facilitate the second language learning, therefore, total banishment of L1 is regarded as an inappropriate preference on the grounds that it has a detrimental effect on learners' identity." To sum up, the previous review presented the rationale and the justifying reasons of those who take a positive-optimistic stand towards the role and usage of (L1) in the teaching-learning of (L2): they argue that learners of English as (L2)do not normally begin learning from stage zero, but, on the contrary, they have already been equipped with (L1) linguistic system ,which makes the whole process as governed, to some extent, by (L1) system; as a result of this , adherents propose that the role and usage of (L1) is an inseparable element and apparently an exploitable resource in the teaching-learning of (L2). Accordingly, they also argue that the total negligence of (L1)may yield damaging effects on the teaching-learning process of (L2) due to the fact that this kind of total banishment of (L1) may lead to a rigid and a tension-generating atmosphere between students and teachers; (L1) , in this sense, is viewed as supportive, facilitating, helpful, relaxing, effective, necessary, beneficial , motivating, and at the end of the day-unavoidable teaching and learning tool of (L2); the adherents of this positive role and usage further argue that learners of English as (L2) think ,consciously or subconsciously ,in the mother tongue, and that the use of (L1) represents a preferred technique to nearly all beginner learners, and is considered an essential facet which is totally connected with those learners' identity. The previous review also highlighted the idea that such a role and usage of (L1) may minimize the learners' anxiety and maximize their motivation while learning (L2), may provide those learners with a comfortable method to quickly acquire (L2) through comparing and filling the gaps between the two linguistic systems of (L1) and (L2). The role and usage of (L1), in accordance with the previous review, emerges as a necessary perquisite to overcome classroom boredom and dullness, controlling any confusion that may arise as a side effect of the difference in the linguistic systems of (L1) and (L2), and , then , reducing learners and students complaint who normally grumble about monolingual teaching strategies. Regardless the fact that the previous review presented a positive-optimistic stand towards the role and usage of (L1)in the teaching-learning of (L2), the researcher believes, in response to the presented review, that the scope of such role and usage of (L1) is found to be limited and not absolute , bounded by a set of variables and conditions . Additionally, those who take that positive-optimistic stand, as revealed by previous review , confirm that any role and usage for (L1) in the teaching-learning of (L2), generally, should be judicious, confined to particular circumstances, responsive to classroom environment, and corresponding with the status ,level, attitudes, and preferences of students and teachers .
3.3. The Negative and skeptical stand towards the role and Usage of (L1) in the teachinglearning of (L2).
The following literature review presents a survey of the considerations of those who take a negativepessimistic stand towards the role and usage of (L1) in the teaching-learning of (L2): ,proposed that "the more students are exposed to English, the more quickly they will learn; as they hear and use English, they will internalize it and begin to think in English."Atkinson, D. , came to the conclusion that "Language teaching researchers and practitioners sticking to the principles of behaviorism began to echo the idea that translation and other L1-based language teaching techniques should be totally removed from language classrooms as it was strongly believed that any use of learners' L1 would intervene with the process of L2 acquisition, resulting in the fossilization of erroneous L2 structures in learners' Inter language systems. Their justification was that, to achieve proficient levels of L2 knowledge, language learners should stay away from their mother tongue as far as possible so that L1 structures would not intervene with L2 structures." Ghobadi, M., &Ghasemi, H.
(2015: 245 ), added that "teaching learners' first language (L1) as point of reference for the second language (L2) have been long discouraged on the ground that these teaching techniques would end in the fossilization of L2 structure forms in the learner's inter-language system."Ghobadi, M., &Ghasemi, H. (2015:251), further explained that "L1 use should not limit the amount of L2 input learners would receive in significant ways."Ghobadi, M., &Ghasemi, H. (2015 :251), also added that "even if L1 use is justified in L2 classrooms, teachers should take care of learner autonomy when letting their students make use of their mother tongue. Learners should not be driven to think that L1 can substitute the L2 whenever they encounter L2 communication problems." Ghobadi 6 ), found that "the teachers disagreed with the statement that using L1 to teach L2 created a natural classroom environment. Furthermore, the four items related to psycholinguistic factors in Table 2 indicated that the teachers acknowledged that modern language teaching methods require L1 use to be kept to a minimum in the English classroom, and that using L1 can deprive students' exposure to the L2. They mostly agreed that it is more efficient to freely switch between L1 and L2 and vice versa in beginning level classes. (2016: 9), added that "The participating teachers, however, have invariably displayed negative attitudes toward the use of L1 in the L2 classroom. This contradiction between classroom practice and teachers' attitudes has implications for L2 pedagogy and teacher education." Alrabah, S., Wu, S. H., Alotaibi, A. M., &Aldaihani, H. A. (2016 : 1 ), finally , came to the conclusion that " the results also showed that the participating teachers exhibited mostly negative attitudes toward L1 use in L2 teaching. This contradiction between classroom practice and attitudes entailed implications for language teacher education programs to better equip EFL bound graduates with appropriate teaching strategies and classroom techniques to use L1 in appropriate ways in the EFL classroom."Debreli, E.
(2016 :24, 25 ), found that " there is ample, and at the same time superficial, evidence suggesting the advantages of using L1 when teaching English in foreign language classrooms, as well as when the students and the teachers require its use."Debreli, E. (2016: 27), added that "it seems that L1 use should be allowed only in circumstances where the instruction need be clearly understood." Debreli, E. (2016 : 30), also explained that "The instances when the non-native teachers' of EFL did not prefer to use L1 in L2 classrooms were when the students were very proficient at L2 use, and when the teachers did not want the L1 to dominate their lessons' pacing."Sevim, İ. N. A. L., &Turhanli, I.
(2019: 861), found that "The teachers' overall attitude towards using L1 was found to be slightly negative in line with the results of the questionnaire yet contradicted with those of the interview. It could be concluded that judicious use of L1 is favored by teachers." Sevim, İ. N. A. L., &Turhanli, I.
(2019: 872), also added that -The teachers in the current study displayed a slightly negative overall attitude towards involvement of L1 in L2 classes." In summary, the previous review of related literature presented the rationale and the reasons of those who take a negative-pessimistic stand towards the role and usage of (L1) in the teaching-learning of (L2): the prominent point of their view is that the use of students' first language may reduce students' exposure to (L2), and this more exposure to (L1) may result in more damage to (L2) input which , in turn , leads to various challenges and obstacles on the road of a acquiring or learning (L2); this wider range of role and usage of (L1) may also result in a great deal of interference, a distorted internalization process of (L2),and a fossilized structures of(L2) which are flavored by (L1) structures . The previous review also concluded that the use of (L1) deprives students from acquiring a pure and authentic input of (L2) which is highly needed to communicate within social contexts outside classroom, may lead students to overly transplant the features of (L1) to (L2), and may orient students towards believing that word for word translation is a useful technique in the process of learning (L2) ; the previous review explained that a classroom environment must provide an abundant exposure to English as (L2) so as to enrich the input and maximize the acquisition process, on the ground that the more exposure to English is facilitated , the more quickly learning may occur, the more English may be acquired , and the better results may be achieved . The previous literature also explained that (L1) should be avoided and not be anchored as a reference for the teaching -learning of (L2) due to the fact that any role and usage of (L1) in the teaching-learning of (L2) may negatively impact (L2) input and exposure; the teaching and learning of (L2) , in accordance with the previous review , should be based on a pedagogy that makes use of language acquisition approach than relying on( L1) to teach (L2) , and should be oriented towards constructing an English environment which guarantees pure and authentic exposure to (L2). To compensate this avoidance and the state of staying away from mother tongue as (L1), the previous literature suggests adopting input-modifying tactics such as demonstration and visual aids like pictures, flashcards, real objects, and gestures so as to make (L2) input digestible and approachable. The previous literature, while acknowledging attitudes of some teachers, in general, urged them not to drive the students to think that (L1) can act as a problemsolving strategy whenever a difficulty is encountered in the process of learning and acquiring (L2), and that teachers should not resort to (L1) just because some aspects of (L2) may be difficult from the perspective of their students ; by the same token, the previous review confirmed that teachers should pay more attention to students autonomy and responsibility while learning (L2). The previous literature revealed some kind of contradiction between what teachers believe about the negativity of using (L1) and their real practice in classrooms which includes an extent of (L1) use which is dictated by various variables and conditions. A number of teachers, the previous literature further revealed, view using (L1) in the teaching-learning of (L2) as amounts to admitting a state of being professionally inadequate English teachers, which is a common phenomenon within an Arabic context, as far as the researcher knows. As a result, the previous literature concluded a set of conclusions: on the one hand, the previous literature concluded that even if the use of (L1) is justifiable to the adherents, who carry a positive-optimistic stand towards the role and usage of (L1) in the teaching-learning of (L2), it should not be used to translate each word said by teachers because students, in this regard, need not to understand every aspect of (L2). The previous literature also concludes that even though there is a bountiful proposed evidence that considers the advantageous role and usage of (L1) in the teaching-learning of (L2) , but , at the same time, this evidence is not absolute, and rather superficial and restricted by various variables that leads to doubt its credibility and practicality; using (L1)in the teaching-learning of ( L2 ) hurts the learning and acquisition process of (L2), and does not necessarily create a normal and natural classroom environment; on the other hand, the previous review confirmed the point that using (L1) in the teaching -learning of (L2) is bounded by different variable such as the context, the students' level, classroom environment, the communicative situation, attitudes of both teachers and learners, and the similarities and differences between the linguistic systems of both (L1) and (L2), and the type and duration of input and exposure of (L2). The previous review, accordingly, recommends that the use of (L1) in the teaching-learning of (L2) should be kept to the minimum level or else be avoided, especially with proficient students of (L2). The separation between (L1) and (L2) should be made so that the structures of (L1) would not intervene with those of (L2), and that the translation and other L1-bounded language teaching methods should be completely removed. The previous review also recommends that would -be teachers should be equipped with ample knowledge and teaching techniques related to the issue and the debate surrounding it. Finally, the previous review recommends that it very possible to facilitate (L2) leaning and acquisition through a limited, restricted, and calculated use of the native language, and that students and learners should be helped and oriented towards employing (L2) to a maximum levels.

The role of Arabic as (L1) in the teaching-learning of English as a foreign (L2).
The  (2009: 19), also"supports the view that a ‗judicious' use of Arabic in bilingual classrooms is beneficial to learning, reflecting views expressed in the current research literature for example."Hamdallah, R. (1999 : 291 ), concluded that "We cannot keep L 1 out of the door of the classroom In a beginners' class, the teacher teaches in English, but the students learn, at least partly in Arabic. Now that we cannot avoid Arabic in the learner's learning process, why should we not bring it to the surface and make use of it? Of course, when a teacher uses L1 in the classroom, he/ she must be very careful." Hamdallah, R. (1999 : 294 ), more explained that "In the Arab world, it is almost impossible to banish the learner's first language, Arabic, when teaching Englilsh as a foreign language. Psychological and motivational factors allow for a judicious use of Ll in L2 teaching. , "in their study of Arab learners of English in the Gulf region conclude that students should be exposed to the L2 since the aim of the FL teaching is to "approximate near-native competence. They also add that L1 use hinder L2 fluency, reduces motivation, and makes learners believe that L1 is useful to learn the L2." Al-Jadidi, H. S. S. (2009: 41), pointed out that -An additional factor is that some Arabic-speaking bilinguals and Omani local teachers may not have enough fluency to be able to conduct their classes wholly or mainly in English." Al-Jadidi, H. S. S. (2009: 158 ), stated that -As a teacher of undergraduate students in a tertiary college, I now minimize my Arabic usage. I consciously limit the amount of Arabic I use and do not allow studentsto use it in the classroom as a general rule." Fareh, S. (2010: 362), found that "A considerable percentage of the class time is run in Arabic. Such a practice minimizes the time of exposure to English and thus the learning outcomes will not be adequately accomplished." Fareh, S.
(2010: 363), also added that "Exposure to English is, by and large, minimal. This can be attributed to the undesirable teaching practices and to the improperly prepared teachers." (Yorkey, 1977), , confirmed that In " the monolinguals said that they used the following strategies to compensate for their lack of Arabic: • Simplifying oral presentations by using modified ‗teacher talk' • Using gestures, acting out word meaning • Extensive use of the white board • Extensive use of dictionaries • Allowing some discussion amongst students in Arabic to share understandings • Looking for and devising alternative means of communication • Motivating and engaging students through authentic relationships and communicative focusing on student needs." In summary, the previous review presented an account of the role and usage of Arabic as (L1) in the teaching-learning of English as foreign (L2); the previous review confirmed that the debate about such a role and usage is still ongoing like the case is in other contexts and situations all over the world. The previous review admitted the existence of problems in teaching English as a foreign (L2) to Arabic-speaking learners and students, and concluded that teaching English throughout the Arab world is not an easy task for various reasons : First, the existent differences in the linguistic systems between English and Arabic which may act as an obstacle towards learning English , and as a justifying reason for using Arabic as (L1) ; second, Arabic -speaking students and learners of English do normally lack the opportunity for an immediate use of English as a foreign (L2) outside classroom environment which indicates a communicative gap that can be filled with using Arabic as (L1); third , the extra demands in regard to large classes which, the researcher believes, an ordinary phenomenon throughout the Arab world, and the cultural and sociolinguistic differences of the two languages . In addition, the role and usage of Arabic as (L1) in the teaching -learning of English as a foreign (L2), in accordance with the previous review, can be admissible and , to some extent, unavoidable because of varieties of justifying reasons: First, it is nearly impossible to completely avoid using Arabic In English classrooms due to the fact that Arabic-speaking learners and students, especially beginners, overtly or covertly resort to Arabic , in one way or an another, while they learn English ; second, the an only-English approach to teach Arab-speaking students, as confirmed by previous review, can be daunting and decelerating factor to the process of English learning and acquisition.
As a result, The findings of the previous literature indicated that the use of Arabic as (L1) in Teaching English as a foreign (L2) is , to some extent , justifiable and acceptable among some teachers , educators , learners , and students, especially at primary levels with beginner learners . In addition, the previous review found that Arabic-speaking students and learners do normally learn or acquire English through an Arabic mentality or exactly as it was called by previous review "mental home"( Al-Jadidi, H. S. S. (2009: 75),which represents a challenge that needs some kind of manipulation, especially where there are some similarities between the linguistic systems of English and Arabic .Arabic-speaking students, in accordance with the findings of the previous review, and in reference to the researchers' own experience , are reported to complain about monolingual teaching strategies of English as a foreign (L2) -to the extent that some college students turn to bilingual classes of some teachers ,who are well-known among those some students, to use Arabic language while teaching English, on the pretext that they -the teachers-are evading ,or else , the breakdown in communication, and because the -the teachers believe that there is no harm in including a little bit of Arabic while teaching English . The previous review acknowledged the essentiality of bilingual teaching , and outlined some conditions where Arabic is unavoidable such as "e.g., clarifying the abstract words, making students feel more relaxed, The previous review also recommends that the limited , restricted, and pounded use of Arabic as (L1) in the teaching-learning of English as (L2), can be compensated by exploiting other sources and techniques such as enhancing a modified English, using gestures, acting , and also using dictionaries inside classroom.

DISCUSSION
This study aimed at investigating the attributes of the role and usage of (L1) in the teaching-learning of (L2), and to investigate the case of Arabic as (L1) in the teaching-learning of English as a foreign (L2). As a result, this study approaches the following two questions: 1. what attributes does the role and usage of (L1) have in the teaching-learning of (L2)? 2. What is the case for Arabic as (L1) in the teaching-learning of English as a foreign (L2)? To achieve the purpose of this study, the researcher followed a qualitative, investigative, and analytical approach throughout the available related literature which was exhibited in a chronological arrangement and presentation.
In regard to the first question of this study : 1. What attributes does the role and usage of (L1) have in the teaching-learning of (L2) ? scrutinizing throughout the available related literaturerevealed the existence of a state of debate ,which has been controversial issue with no considerable and settled conclusion, between those who hold positive-optimistic stand towardsthe role and usage of (L1) in the teaching-learning of (L2), and those who hold a conservative-skeptical stand towards such kind of role and usage ; argumentsinthisregard are still developing ,and the question whether (L1) hinders or facilitates the learning and acquisition of (L2),with its implications on the teaching process,is still pending for further research and examination.Those who adhere to the positive role of (L1) in the teaching-learning of (L2), and in accordance with previous literature, build their position upon various rationales and justifying reasons : first, they argue that (L1) learners and students of (L2) ,normally, start the learning and acquiring the process of (L2) while they are immersed in (L1) linguistic system which is , generally , different from the linguistic system of (L2)-like the situation with Arabicspeaking students and learners , where English is taught as a foreign (L2); second , the role and usage of (L1), in accordance with the points of view of those who hold a positive-optimistic stand, seems to be unavoidable and inevitable move to fill the linguistic gaps between the different linguistic systems of (L1) and (L2), and to create a relaxed , easy, and comprehendible connection with both (L1) and (L2); third, there are some teachers and educators who believe that there is no harm in using a little bit of (L1) in the teaching-learning of (L2), especially with beginner learners and by novice teachers , and as far as it is advantageous, facilitating, and ,to some extent, fruitful; switching or using (L1) in the teaching-learning of (L2) is a preferred endeavor to some teachers , students , and learners because such usage of (L1) can lead to tranquilizing students and learners and goes with their requirements and preferences , and it can also control the problematic teaching rhythm of the teachers inside classroom , even though it carries a collateral risk . This collateral risk is acknowledged by those who hold a positive-optimistic stand towards the role and usage of (L1) in the teaching-learning of (L2) as they believe that any such a role of (L1) should be limited, judicious, and responsive to different variables and conditions.  28), concluded that " Cultural and terminological differences between L1 and L2 seemed to be the main difficulty, and the teachers often thought that they were unable to socialize when they used L2. As they viewed socialization as an important element of the classroom, this required L1 use in some instances." Debreli, E. (2016 : 30 ), also concluded that "Unexpectedly, the majority of the teachers in the study criticized the existing English-only policies they had to follow, and they accepted the fact that they were not enjoying teaching because of the L1 restrictions. Further, they went beyond and mentioned how they played the role of perceiving L2-only use aseffective-just to please their administrators. More importantly, they mentioned how they deceived the administration by pretending they were not using L1 or allowing its use by the students." Regardless this optimistic state towards the role and usage of (L1) in the teaching-learning of (L2), a skeptical-negative state of being exists throughout previous related research on the ground that this role and usage can be totally damaging to the input, intake , and exposure of (L2), and , as a result, contradicts with the essence of the process of acquiring and learning of (L2) which should not be (L1) -dependent as far as possible ; in addition, those who hold a skeptical-negative stand towards the role and usage of (L1) strongly argue that the setback within the positive -optimistic rationale of those supporters of such a role is that theythe supporters-approach the issue in a very general sense which is conditioned by different variables, and corresponds with the desires , attitudes, and preference of teachers , students, and learners as well. Moreover , this role and usage of (L1), in accordance with such a negative -skeptical state of being, lacks the essential referential definition that can draw the line of its boundaries, and, by the same token , orient the attention of those who are concerned towards the scope , volume, timing, and the circumstances of such a role and usage of (L1); Ghobadi, M., &Ghasemi, H. (2015 :252 ),reflected the same reasoning by stating that " Therefore, the question is not whether L1 use should be included in language classrooms, as it should be; rather, the question is how much and in what situations the teacher and learners can turn to L1 use in language classrooms."Sevim, İ. N. A. L., &Turhanli, I. (2019: 861 ), also concluded that " Scholars' opinions on the use of first language (L1) during language learning and teaching have been affected by a number of pedagogical, linguistic, and ideological factors throughout the history of foreign language teaching." Accordingly, and as proposed by this study, this debate and controversy, which is related to the role and usage of (L1) in the teaching-learning of (L2) , constitutes an indirect result to the absence of defining the corresponding attributes that are linked to such a role and usage of (L1).The definition of those attributes may help in anchoring the reasoning , of those who hold positive-optimistic stand and those who hold a negative-skeptical stand,toan established understanding and a directive beacon as well, and as a , may help in exploiting the strong points which are considered by both the supporters and opponents.
In regard to the second question of this study: 2. What is the case of Arabic as (L1) in the teachinglearning of English as a foreign (L2)? Scrutinizing through the available related literature revealed that the state of debate and controversy also extends to be existent within the Arabic setting: The same reasoning is applicable , and the debate and argument about the role and usage of Arabic as (L1) in the teaching-learning of English as a foreign (L2) , between those who take a positiveoptimistic stand and those who take a negative -skeptical standtowardssuch a role and usage, is still ongoing without reaching a settled conclusion .This state of debate and conflict , within an Arabic setting, is reflected by previous research such as Hamdallah, R. (1999 : 289-291 ), who confirmed its existence by stating that "maxims such as "only L2 should be used in the classroom "or, "L1 should not be allowed in the classroom" are not, in our view, psychologically healthy for the teacher or the learner. They are most unrealistic in the context of countries in which English is taught and used as a foreign language as is the case in all Arab countries where most of the teachers of English, whether they admit it or not, use Arabic." The adoption of Arabic , as (L1) in the teaching-learning of English as (L2), seems to be justifiable and admissible to some teachers and educators because of various legitimizing reasons : first , English, in an Arabic setting, is basically taught and learnt as a foreign language, which means encountering hindering differences within the linguistic systems of both Arabic and English on the one hand , and providing and excuse towards the adoption of Arabic as (L1) for those who support the idea ; second , bilingual teaching and learning is preferred by a number of teachers and students as well, as it is , for some Arabic teachers of English , a method to evade problematic teaching and learning situations that may arise as a result of those differences, and as a way of tranquilizing Arabicspeaking students who normally prefer bilingual teaching and learning.
Those who take a negative -skeptical stand towards the role and usage of Arabic as (L1) in the teaching-learning of English as a foreign (L2) argue that the setback in such a role and usage of Arabic as (L1) is that it is confined to various limitations ,pre-conditions, and specific teachinglearning environments, contexts and settings, and the attitudes and preferences of both teachers and students, rather than on empirical evidence ; a second setback is that some Arabic teachers feel some kind of stigma using Arabic while teaching English because it may indicate a negative judgment to their English proficiency and capabilities ; Debreli, E. (2016 :24 ), in accordance , concludes that "Due to the long tradition of English-only policies and its obligation-based positive perceptions stemming from the mid-1900s, however, many non-native teachers of English still feel ashamed of using L1 in their classrooms, not because it is not beneficial, but because they view it as a personal failure." As a result, and in accordance with the findings of this study, it can be concluded that the corresponding attributes of such kind of role and usage of (L1) can be best defined as to beutterly pragmatic, expedient, instrumental, and quite feasible, and not based on empirical atmosphere or evidenced rationale and reasoning.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION
The genesis of the study was to investigate the attributes that better modify the role and usage of (L1) in the teaching-learning of (L2), and to investigate the case of Arabic as (L1) in the teaching -learning of English as a foreign (L2). Findings of the study, in accordance with the findings of the available related literature, confirmed the existence of a state of debate and controversy between those who take an adoptive-positive stand, and those who take a skeptical-negative stand towards the role and usage of (L1) in the teaching-learning of (L2); such a state of debate and controversy is still ongoing without, yet, reaching a settled conclusion. Findings of this study propose that this state of debate and controversy exists as a direct side-effect of the absence of any definition to the attributes that modify such and a role and usage of (L1) in the teaching-learning of (L2) ; findings of this study concludes that once such definitions to the attributes related to the role and usage of (L1) in the teachinglearning of (L2) are established , they may act as a reference point and a beacon which sheds more light and better understanding on the issue; this more light and more understanding can enable educators, teachers, and education planners to better exploit such a role and usage of (L1) in the teaching-learning of (L2). As far as the role and usage of Arabic as (L1) in the teaching-learning of English as a foreign (L2) is concerned , findings of this study acknowledge the same state of debate and controversy between adherents and opponents to such a role and usage; findings of this study indicate that some Arabic teachers switch to Arabic while teaching English as a way of evading problematic teaching-learning situations as a number of Arabic-speaking students and learners prefer bilingual teaching rather than an English-only teaching. Findings of this study also concludes that some Arabic teachers feel some kind of stigma whenever they use Arabic while teaching English because this may indicate an inadequate English proficiency and capability.
This study concludes that the role and usage of (L1) in the teaching -learning of (L2) can be attributed as to be utterly pragmatic, expedient, instrumental, and quite feasible methodology because of some related reasons: first, those adherents of such role and usage of (L1) in the teaching-learning of (L2)do believe that such a role and usage of (L1) is not absolute , but on the contrary, it should be as limited and judicious as possible; second, this role and usage is bounded with different variables and restrictions such the students level-beginners, intermediate, or advanced, the learning environment, the setting within which language is taught or learnt as a foreign or a second; third, this role and usage of (L1) is resorted to as a way of evading problematic teaching-learning situations, and in response to the preferences of students and learners ; forth, what enforces the proposition of this study is that the role and usage of (L1) is not anchored to a formidable source which is clearly defined and evidenced by previous related literature.
This study also concludes that those opponents to the role and usage of (L1) in the teaching-learning of (L2) believe that the wider space for the use of (L1) , the more damage to the exposure and input of (L2) that may yield a distorted patterns of (L2) that are flavored by the (L1) aroma and taste , and , in addition, contradicts with the essence of learning or acquiring an (L2) which should be directed into producing patterns of (L2) that are nearly native -like and (L1)-free as far as possible.

Recommendations
In line with the findings and conclusions of this research , and in accordance with findings and conclusions of the available related literature, this study recommends that more empirical research is needed in regard to the attributes of the role and usage of (L1) in the teaching-learning of (L2) , and in a correlative approach with the teachers' attitudes and understanding towards such attributes , and the impact of these attitudes and understanding on the teaching-learning of English in both foreign or second settings. This study also recommends carrying out further research on the scope, the practicality, and the timing of such a role and usage of (L1) in the teaching-learning of (L2). This study recommends that further studies are needed to provide empirical evidence on the impact of using (L1) in the teaching -learning of (L2) on the exposure, input of (L2), and on the students processing and intake process of English learning and acquisition.
In regard to the role and usage of Arabic as (L1) in the teaching -learning of English as a foreign (L2), this study recommends that more comparative linguistic studies are needed approaching the difference between the linguistic systems of both Arabic and English as they -these differencesrepresent a central excuse of using Arabic as (L1) in the teaching -learning of English as (L2); this study also recommends , in this regard, that Arabic should not be resorted to because it is a preference to some Arabic -speaking students, nor should it be used as a method of evading problematic situations while teaching-learning English. This study recommends that further research is also needed in order to shed more light on the phenomenon of the feeling of stigma when using (L1)whether it is Arabic or any other native language-while teaching English, on the ground that this usage may be considered as a negative indicator about the teacher's proficiency and capability in English. Finally, this study recommends carrying out quantitative studies to investigate the impact of the built-in linguistic Arabic linguistic system on students and learners' achievement and acquisition of English language.