In order to avoid the creation of a new hybrid Arabic, which would somehow include an intersection of RA's with SA, we will bring the gap between the two a little closer.
In the process of Arabic technical documentation, a balance between both tiers (SA and RA) is wiser than emphasizing one over the other. In our technical context, we must examine the elixir formula, deducing solutions based on its responsibility for the survival of Arabs as a culture.
Technical Arabization falls under the media usage. Please refer to Table 1 for a list of Arabic classifications. This should not be an obstacle to simplification, in fact it is a vehicle toward simplification. In effect, the function of the SA is to act as the intelligible medium to Arabic in any given environment and at any level of education.
| Type | Example |
| Mother Arabic | Quran |
| Standard Arabic | Media |
| Regional Arabic | Conversations |
Another issue to consider is the user's familiarity with the English language and prior knowledge of existing computer applications. The borrowing (discussed in more detail later) is here advised, as it accelerates the user's ability to read and understand unarabized computer literature (e.g. man pages, etc.)
A good balance of SA, RA, and borrowing, as well as providing the user with the proper tools to independently accumulate a larger vocabulary from the target language (English, French, etc.) is the recipe for technical Arabization.
Harakat are generally omitted from literature in Standard Arabic. However, there are special cases where they are mandatory, especially in translations of UI's (User Interfaces).
If the 'haraka' is a shadda then it is mandatory to place. Consider the shadda to be the equivalent of a character itself.
If the omission or addition of a haraka can change the meaning of the word. For example, the word قران and قرآن are fundamentally different.
In the translation of a UI, the verb forms play a fundamental role. In a survey of what the users would like to see, the overwhelming majority prefer the noun form as opposed to the imperative form.
For this reason, the following rule is to be followed: If the user is performing a task that will hopefully result in feedback from the application or system, the noun form is to be used. However, if the system is the one expecting the user to provide input, the imperative form is used.
For example, in the case of a "File->Open" operation, it would be in noun form. However, if the system is asking the user to "Enter Username", the imperative form is to be used.
Foreign city and person names should be translated as commonly known, referenced against the following references:
If the name is not found then it is to be transliterated and inputted into QaMoose for future references.
Arab scholars have a tendency to be strongly conservative against the borrowing from other languages. In contrast, the English language has gained more words than any other existing language today[4].
Borrowing should be limited to an absolute minimum and left as a last resort.
This law says that borrowing should only occur when the resulting translation would go against the common popular. That is to avoid the awkwardness which plagues our current Arabic technical literature.
For example, the English words CD, Internet, disk are so commonly used that it would be a more likely candidate than an inferior translation such as القرص المدمج.
In the case where two common terms are used to describe one thing (e.g. [حاسوب and كمبيوتر], it is left up to the translator. The scarcity of Arabic computer literature legacy allows for a greater degree of freedom.
However, translators are advised against the abuse of this option. Although interchangeability can help when reading different material, it can lead to a lot of unnecessary confusion. When unsure, put the additional terms between parenthesis to clarify the usage.
There are many acronyms and abbreviations in computer and technical terminology, which makes it difficult to introduce Arabic equivalents. To resolve this issue the technical writer is to do the following:
Product names should always be transliterated in Arabic characters. This is regardless of whether they are an acronym or an abbreviation.
All other acronyms (e.g. HTML, SGML, HTTP) should be transcribed in their Latin form (using English characters), but their translated antonyms could be added between parenthesis for clarification.
[4] A fact that is conveniently omitted during our public education. English has about 700,000 words whereas Arabic only has about 200,000.