Regional variation in the syntactic use of qad reflexes: Convergence or divergence in Saudi Arabic varieties?

Abstract In Classical Arabic (CA), qad, a discourse particle has been extensively studied. However, the linguistic behavior of the different reflexes of the particle qad in Saudi varieties (SVs), namely gid, gīd, jid, and dzid, has not been studied. Due to this lack, the current study, as primary exploratory, aimed to describe the syntactic uses of qad reflexes in SVs. In doing so, interviews were conducted in which a structured questionnaire was used with several CA scenarios describing different situations and asking participants to express them in their dialect varieties. For this study, 150 speakers from five SVs participated. The results revealed that qad reflexes are used in verbal sentences in SVs. However, unlike qad in CA, in SVs qad reflexes also occur in interrogative and negative sentences, and nominal phrases (i.e., immediately preceding the nouns). With reference to frequency, they are more often used in Southwestern and Hijazi and to a lesser extent in Najdi variety. However, they are less frequent in Eastern and Northern varieties. Although it is not possible to confirm with full reliability and certainty that this change is a divergence or convergence, yet it seems that qad, as many other Arabic linguistic features, is a case of divergence. Alternatively, the rich presence of qad reflexes in the Saudi Arabian spoken varieties suggests that the syntax of qad in CA might not have been documented completely. If this argument is to be understood better, further sociolinguistic studies are needed.


Introduction
Dialect convergence and divergence "describe the increase and decrease in similarity between languages" (Auer et al., 2005, p. 1). These two linguistic behaviors represent two opposite directions of language change. Such language changes may occur because of contact between speakers of different regional dialects. Hence, outlining a linguistic change is useful for identifying similarities and differences among varieties. Among linguistic features, particles, which express different grammatical functions and meanings, are subjected to diverse variations. Tracking their shift would lead to a more thorough understanding of the potential change.
Classical Arabic (CA) is rich in (discourse) particles. A common discourse particle that is used to indicate several functions is qad. Many scholarly studies have shown intense interest in this common discourse particle in CA (e.g., Al-Suyūtī, 1861;Al-Zabīdī, 1944;Fehri, 2012;Salamah, 2019). However, recent studies have shown an interesting shift, in that more studies have examined the use of qad in different Arabic varieties (e.g., Al-Azraqi, 1998;Al-Azraqi, 2014;Alhaider, 2021;Holes, 2004Holes, , 2006. Compared to CA, the particle qad exhibits interestingly different reflexes in Saudi Arabic regional varieties, namely gid, gīd, jid, and dzid. The linguistic behavior of these reflexes in terms of syntactic use and the phonological aspects have not been thoroughly studied. With reference to syntax, to date, no comparative sociolinguistic studies have scrutinized the syntactic use of qad reflexes in Saudi Arabic varieties (henceforth, SVs) except two studies about Abha Arabic (see Al-Azraqi, 2014;Alhaider, 2021). To fill this lacuna, the current study aimed to describe the syntactic use of the particle qad reflexes in five main geographical areas in Saudi Arabia: Najd (central region), Hijaz (western region), the North, the East, and the Southwest. As a starting point, a brief review of the functions and syntactic use of qad in CA is presented below.

Qad in classical arabic
As a discourse particle, qad in CA has several functions. In this section, the review of the functions of qad is brief and lacks examples due to space limitations and since the scope of the paper is to describe the syntactic use of qad, which is discussed in more detail. Reviewing the available literature, Bahloul (2008) summarizes the descriptions of early Arabic grammarians, which are divided into three major hypotheses, as he claims. He concludes that qad has been examined in terms of temporal, aspectual, and emphatic functions. In the temporal hypothesis, when the particle qad occurs with the past form of the verb, it conveys that the action expressed by the verb happened in the recent past. In demonstrating the aspectual hypothesis of qad, as Bahloul explains in reference to early grammarians that qad is used with the past form of the verb as an indication of completed actions. Regarding the emphatic hypothesis, Bahloul agrees with Al-Suyūtī (1861) who mentions that this particle is also used for emphasis. Salamah (2019, p. 53) concludes that "qad occurs with both past and non-past forms of Arabic verbs to perform functions that may be temporal/aspectual or modal." Regarding the syntactic use of qad in CA, it occurs mainly in verbal sentences. It functions differently, as it indicates tense/aspects and emphasis. When qad is used in verbal sentences, it occurs as a preverbal particle with verbs in the past and present aspects (Al-Zamakhshari, 1999), as explained below.

qad preceding perfect verbs
The particle qad can precede perfect verbs to indicate assertion and the perfect aspect, as in: (1) qad ġarabatu aš-šamsu.
PRT set PST 3SGM the sun "The sun has set." Fehri (2012, p. 79) also explains the use and the function of qad that qad could mean "already" preceding "the 'participle' of a complex perfect tense." In addition, Comrie (1976) asserts that the perfect aspect of verbal sentences in CA is conveyed through the particle qad. The particle qad can also be used in a structure to indicate the present perfect tense, in relation to the present, by preceding a simple tense verb, as Fehri (2012) explains. Thus, he offers two readings for the following sentence, which is thus seen to be ambiguous: (2) qad waṣala.
PRT arrive PST 3SGM "He has already/just arrived, or he did arrive." Fehri (2012) characterizes the ambiguity by explaining that besides the indication of the present perfect tense, qad can, as in the preceding example, mean "indeed" or "in fact" to stress the factual certainty of the event. In this case, according to Fehri, qad can be accompanied by past adverbials, such as yesterday. It should be noted that when it means indeed, qad is an emphatic particle used to express emphatic meanings (Alramadan, 2020). Hence, according to Fehri (2012), qad means "already" when it is a perfect detector; yet, it is a model meaning "indeed" when combined with a past verb, and "possible" or "probable" when combined with a present verb, which is explained below.

qad preceding imperfect verbs
The particle qad can precede an imperfect verb to indicate an improbable yet possible event, as in: (3) al-kaðūba qad yaṣduqu. the liar 3SGM PAR tell.PROG 3SGM the truth "The liar could tell the truth." The particle qad in Example (3) indicates expectations or hopes that the liar can tell the truth. To summarize, Fehri (2012) concludes that the interpretation of qad varies according to the temporal entity with which it is conjoined.
In addition, qad occurs in a few cases in nominal sentences in CA. Al-Anṣarī (n.d.) argues that qad in this case can function as a noun on its own expressing the meaning of "enough." According to Al-Anṣarī, qad does not function as a particle, but as a noun with a specific meaning. For example: (4) qadhu raġīfun.
PAR.PR3SGM bread "A loaf of bread is enough for him." The particle qad in Example 4 is a nominal phrase that can be translated literally into "a loaf of bread is enough for him." Here, qad functions as the word hasbuhu, i.e., "it is just enough." Below is a brief review of the available literature on qad in SVs and the selected regional varieties.

The particle qad in Saudi varieties
The use of qad reflexes in SVs has not been extensively examined. The available studies on qad in SVs are limited to the dialect of Abha. Al-Azraqi (2014) examined the frequency of the use of gid, a cognate of qad in this dialect, among Abha speakers. She concluded that gid is used less frequently by younger educated speakers. It is worth noting that Al-Azraqi's findings are not limited to the use of gid preceding imperfect verbs. However, Al-Azraqi (2014) stated that gid is used commonly in nominal phrases as well by both older uneducated speakers and younger educated speakers, a case that has not been documented in CA.
Similarly, Alhaider (2021) also investigated the use of gid by Asiri speakers of Abha. She discussed the semantic function and syntactic distribution of qad/qid. She argued that in Standard Arabic, qad has three functions, namely, a probability model as in "may or might," a perfective auxiliary as in "have, has, and had," and finally an emphatic purpose as in "do, does, and did." The particle qid [as pronounced] in Abha Arabic, on the other hand, has two meanings, namely, "how, has, and had" (perfective auxiliary), and the past tense of the English copula was/became (a linking verb). Moreover, Alhaider's (2021, p. 92 indicated that qid and qad are not adverbs, since "qid does not have the same adverbial distribution in a sentence (i.e., initially, medially and finally), but appears only initially and medially." In addition, regarding its semantic-syntactic meanings and functions, Alhaider (2021, p. 3) explains that qad can "naturalize discourse," filling a number of functions, i.e., filler (empty meaning), emphatic modality, and temporal. Accordingly, studies have identified qad as an adverb (Abu-Chacra, 2007;Bahloul, 2016;Najm, 2018;Ryding, 2005), a model (Messaoudi, 1985;Salamah, 2019), and temporal (Farghal, 2019). It is worth noting that Bahloul (2016, p. 261) argues that as assertive modality qad is "inherent to the use of the verbal particle qad, a discourse function which does not exclude previous temporal and aspectual interpretations." There is a substantial lack of research on qad as a discourse particle in SVs. There have been only two attempts to examine the frequency and function of qad in SVs, in Abha dialects, in particular (see Al-Azraqi, 2014;Alhaider, 2021). Syntactic use needs to underpin all the semantic and functional explanations. Any attempt to reveal the functions and meanings of qad without considering relevant syntactic information is underdeveloped and incomplete because, as Darmasetiyawan and Ambridge (2022) argue, "syntactic representations contain semantic information." This echoes Crane's (1990, p. 192) statement, i.e., the meaning of words is determined by their use . . . [, which reflects] the uncontroversial understanding of the slogan "Meaning is Use"." To address this issue to contribute to the existing literature and enrich the discussion on both linguistic and discoursal functions of qad in SVs, the current study aims to survey the various syntactic use and frequency of qad in SVs, namely Hijazi, Najdi, Southwestern, Northern, and Eastern, (1) to identify the syntactic use of qad in SVs and determine if the change, if any, is a divergence or convergence, and (2) to provide scholars who are interested in the discoursal functions of qad in SVs with necessary syntactic information. There are linguistic studies on SVs, and the following section offers a general review of these varieties from a linguistic perspective.

Saudi Arabia regional varieties
According to Watson (2011, p. 887), Old Arabic, spoken in the north of the Arabian Peninsula as a result of trade, seasonal migration, and Islamic conquests, gradually replaced the ancient North and South Arabian languages. Behnstedt and Woidich (2013, p. 303) argue that local Arabic dialects "are disappearing in favor of more regionally expanded varieties." Regarding social factors, as Watson (2011) posits, education and urbanization are among the pivotal factors that facilitate the replacement of some dialect features in favor of koine features. These modern emerging dialects, according to Owens (2006, p. 6), "have an indispensable role in an account of Arabic language history." Classifying the Arabic dialects in the Arabian Peninsula, together with the dialect of Saudi Arabia, is not an easy task. In regions with a continuous geographical spread of the population, i.e., no political borders, it is impossible to make a clear-cut division between dialect areas (Ingham, 1982a). This is the same case when dealing with Saudi spoken varieties, especially in the North and East of Saudi Arabia, where they share many features. Nevertheless, several attempts have been made to classify the Peninsular dialects. Western scholars, including Johnstone (1967a), Ingham, 1982b, Ingham, 1994, and Prochazka (1988) attempted to classify these dialects. According to Johnstone, 1967a), dialects spoken in the Arabian Peninsula can be categorized into four groups: 1) Northern Arabic, 2) Hijazi, 3) South-west Arabic, and 4) Omani. Ingham (1994), on the other hand, divided the regions of the Arabian Peninsula based on their geographical nature, namely: Hijaz, Yemen, Oman, Eastern Arabia, and Najd. Prochazka (1988), however, divided the dialects of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia into two groups: 1) the Southern Hijazi and Tihami dialects, and 2) the Najdi and Eastern dialects.
Besides the studies conducted by Western scholars, Al-Darsūnī (1434 H) divided Saudi dialects by region into five groups, namely, 1) dialects in the center of Arabia, 2) dialects in the north and northwest, 3) dialects in the central-western Arabian Peninsula, 4) dialects in southwestern Arabia, and 5) dialects in the east of the Arabian Peninsula. Al-Azraqi et al. (forthcoming) classified Saudi varieties into five main geographical regions according to their geographical proximity as well as similarities and differences in their linguistic features. These five groups are 1) Najdi dialect, 2) Hijazi dialect, 3) Southwestern dialect, 4) Eastern dialect, and 5) Northern dialect.
In the current study, the dialects of Saudi Arabia were divided into five groups (see Map 1). Two of these, Hijazi and Najdi, are known as specific varieties used in western and central Saudi Arabia, respectively. The remaining three groups were named according to their geographical distribution: Southwestern, Eastern, and Northern. The Hijazi variety is a dialect of the western region of Saudi Arabia, which is the second most populous region of Saudi Arabia. The word Hijaz itself refers to a geographical area, i.e., the Western Province of Saudi Arabia that stretches through the northwest and includes Makkah, Madinah, Jeddah, and Taif. According to Alqahtani and Sanderson (2019), there are two varieties of Hijazi, urban and rural. Interestingly, Abu-Melhim (2014) posits that some of Hijazi varieties have some features of Egyptian Arabic. Yet, as Omar (1975, p. v) argues, Hijazi is "the most widely understood dialect in the Arabian Peninsula." The Hijazi variety has attracted scholarly attention and has been extensively studied. Seiny (1978) examined the syntax of urban Hijazi Arabic. Bakalla (1979) investigated both phonological and morphological aspects of the Hijazi variety. Al-Mozainy (1981) examined vowel alternations in the Hijazi dialect (the Beduin variety). Kheshaifaty (1989) examined grammatical variations that exist in the Hijazi dialect. Al-Shehri (1993) conducted a sociolinguistic study examining how urbanization affected the linguistic behavior of rural immigrants who were urbanized in Hijaz.
The second most populous variety is Najdi, the dialect of the Najdi region, the Central Province in Saudi Arabia, which is "classified as a sedentary dialect . . . linguistically it is of a Bedouin type" (Almotairi, 2015, p. 2). It is worth noting that Najd is bordered by the Hijaz region to the west and the Southwestern region, where the southwestern variety is spoken, to the south. Ingham (1994) explained that there are three sub-varieties of the Najdi dialect, namely, North Najdi, Central Najdi, and South Najdi. These varieties, as Ingham (1994) elaborates, share selected linguistic aspects that distinguish Najdi dialects from the other surrounding varieties and dialects. He also examined selected linguistic features related to central Najd (Ingham, 1980). P. P. Abboud (1964), P. F. Abboud (1978Abboud ( ), & 1979 also conducted studies on the Najdi dialect, which are leading studies

Map 1. Saudi Arabia geographical regions (adapted by the authors).
in this area, particularly Hayil. Johnstone (1967a) investigated the syllabification of Oneizah, a dialect of Najd. Al-Hazmi (1975) studied the Harb dialect, which is spoken by a huge tribe that occupies an area from Hijaz to central Najd. This dialect has features in common with those of Najdi and Hijazi, and for this reason, alone is worthy of further study.
The varieties used in the Southwestern can be seen in the dialect used in Abha and the surrounding areas. They are modern dialects that are the result of koineization emerging from contact of various subdialects (Al-Azraqi, 2014, 2016; Al-Azraqi, 2019). These sub-dialects, according to Al-Azraqi (1998), are used by villagers living around Abha and spread to Abha as villagers migrated to the city. These varieties, as a result of contact, merged to produce a variety that is currently used by the people of Abha. Like all varieties, this variety went through various processes of change as a result of a number of social factors such as, but not limited to, education, communication, and immigration. This variety has its own linguistic aspects that distinguish it from other dialects (Al-Azraqi, 1998). This dialect was studied both phonologically and morphologically by Nakshabandi (1988). There are also two dialects that belong to the same region, namely, the Ghamdi and Zahrani dialects, located north of Asir and south of Hijaz, which were examined by Nadawi (1968). Finally, the Northern and Eastern varieties, which are less populous, comprise several sub-varieties from the Northeast to Northwest. Unfortunately, few studies have been conducted on these varieties. Ingham (1980Ingham ( , 1982aIngham ( , 1982bIngham ( , 1986aIngham ( , 1986bIngham ( , 1994Ingham ( , 1997 conducted extensive studies and described in detail the varieties used in the Eastern region (for further analysis, including varieties in the Gulf, see, also Johnstone, 1961Johnstone, , 1965Johnstone, , 1967aJohnstone, , 1967b).
The review above shows that Saudi dialects and varieties are primarily exploratory and noncomparative, reporting the outcome of a linguistic feature of one Saudi dialect or variety. Hence, the current study compares the selected Saudi varieties with respect to a linguistic feature, namely, qad reflexes.
1.2.1.1. The linguistic description of qad in the Saudi Regional dialect. As a uvular stop, the consonant /q/ in the four reflexes of the particle qad in Saudi varieties (SVs) varies in pronunciation according to the sound system of each regional dialect (Al-Azraqi et al., forthcoming). These variants are the features of these dialects. That is, the consonant /q/ is realized as: • /j/ or /dj/, shifting from uvular stop to alveolar fricative or affricate, in the Northern and Eastern dialects.
• /g/, shifting from uvular stop to velar stop, in the Southern and Western dialects.
It should be noted that this is not peculiar to the case of qad. For example, in Saudi Arabic, /q/ in the word qidr [i.e., pot] has different variants, i.e., gidr, dzir, and jidr (see, also Holes, 2018). It should be noted that this sound has more variants in the dialects used outside the Arabian Peninsula. It is /ʔ/ in Egyptian and other Arabic dialects (see, Maamouri et al., 2004;El Salman, 2016). This variation in qad is not related to whether it is a temporal or discourse-mode particle. It is the sound system of the dialects that causes this variation. The current study is interested in the description and frequency of the syntactic uses of qad, regardless of its semantic meanings.

Methodology
As noted earlier, due to the lack of studies on the Saudi Arabic syntactic use of this particle, the present study is exploratory, aiming to describe the various syntactic uses of the reflexes of the particle qad in five Saudi regional varieties, namely, Hijazi, Najdi, Southwestern, Northern, and Eastern, in terms of four syntactic structures, i.e., verbal, nominal, negation, and interrogation. These varieties were selected as they represent the main regions of Saudi Arabia. It is worth noting that qad in nominal phrases immediately precedes nouns. Accordingly, when the term "nominal phrase" is used in this study, it refers to the position of qad immediately preceding nouns.

Data collection
The data of this study was quantitative and collected through interviews in which a structured questionnaire was used. The main part of the interview focused on four subsections of four grammatical structures, i.e., verbal sentences (past and present), nominal sentences, negative sentences, and interrogatives. In each part, participants were given several scenarios using Standard Arabic to describe different situations and then asked to express certain ideas in their dialects using qad.
Participants were asked to write all possible ways in which they might express the same idea. In addition, they were asked to indicate if they ALWAYS, SOMETIMES, or NEVER use the sentences they wrote. This method of data collection was used to eliminate participant's bias and to collect specific information regarding the use of the particle qad. This method also helped to test the prior hypothesis formulated by the authors based on their observations. That is, compared to the use of qad in CA, qad is used in various syntactic structures in the selected SVs with different frequencies.
Survey-based data collection in dialectology research can be unreliable unless some considerations are addressed. To ensure the validity of the questionnaire and ensure that it addressed the aims of this study and was error-free, two colleagues read and reviewed the questionnaire and provided valuable comments. In addition, the questionnaire was examined by the committee of the Deanship of Research as a routine procedure. All comments and feedback were taken into consideration when the questionnaire was revised before conducting the pilot study. A pilot study was conducted to ensure the validity and clarity of the questionnaire by recruiting 35 participants. Although some items had to be changed, the pilot study showed that the questionnaire was generally clear and that the items were relevant to the aims of the study. On the other hand, the reliability of the questionnaire was established by conducting the test-retest reliability method. The questionnaire was administered again within a month interval by recruiting the same participants, the results were compared, and the test-retest correlation was calculated. The correlation coefficient (r) value was 0.90 establishing the reliability of the questionnaire.

Participants
The participants were randomly selected using the selected varieties. The random sampling method increased the generalizability of the results and eliminated sampling bias. It also allowed participants with various educational backgrounds from different age groups to participate. In this study, 150 speakers of the selected regional varieties participated, as shown in Table 1: It is worth noting that the sample comprised of both male and female participants. Their ages ranged from 20 to 65 years old. In terms of education, all the participants had at least a high school diploma and above. These social variables were not considered in the findings of this study.

Procedures
To carry out the questionnaire, five people were recruited to help collect the data in these different areas. 1 Four of these field workers assisted the first author in previous studies. The newcomer was provided clear instructions in advance. To collect the data, the field workers sent a letter to the participants using WhatsApp, in which they were invited to participate in a linguistic study on dialects. The fieldworkers created five WhatsApp groups including the authors. Each group included 30 to 38 participants. These groups were useful for establishing close contact with the participants at the beginning and addressing any questions. The interviews were conducted online from July 4th to December 2 nd , 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic; therefore, online meetings provided a safe and secure way for the participants to meet. Through the WhatsApp groups, the participants were sent Zoom links to join Zoom meetings to explain the procedures of the study and collect the necessary forms and data. Four to seven online interviews were conducted for each group, where five to eleven participants met at once. The authors held meetings along with the fieldworkers; they were keen to follow the focus group interview procedures as much as possible. The breakout room tool was utilized to address specific questions of each participant separately. Using the chat tool, the questionnaire link created using Google Forms was sent to the participants. Before taking the questionnaire, the participants were asked to read and sign a consent form including the details of the study. The researchers explained to the participants the purpose of the study, the consent form, their rights, and the procedures of data collection. The chat tool was restricted so that the participants could only communicate with the researchers to ask questions. More focused meetings were conducted in which the linguistic data were collected through the scenario contexts given to the participants. These focused meetings covered almost 168 people, but only 150 were sufficiently credible to be used. The data were then coded by the researchers and a t-test was performed to examine the significance of the results.

Coding
The questionnaire was designed to collect both quantitative and qualitative data, yet the analysis of the collected data was quantitative. To conduct the analysis, an Excel spreadsheet was designed to code the sentences that the participants used to describe the different scenarios they were provided with. In the coding process, the researchers coded the sentences as (1) when qad was used and (0) when it was not. In addition, the participants were asked to indicate whether they always or sometimes use the sentences they gave. When qad was used, the sentences were coded according to the participants' input. When they were not used, their sentences were coded as never. In the Findings section, some examples are provided for illustration purposes.

Limitations and strengths of the study
There are several potential limitations to the current study. First, the lack of previous studies on the use of qad in the selected Saudi varieties limited the literature review and scope of this study. Second, another limitation is regarding the method of data gathering. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, close physical contact was impossible. Accordingly, Zoom, WhatsApp, and online questionnaire links were utilized as methods of communication, as explained above, to achieve social distancing. Fortunately, this was practical and achieved the purpose of this study. Third, the goal of this study was limited to the five main regions of Saudi Arabia, thus, future studies are essential to trace the change in the use of qad reflexes among speakers of the same region, considering social variables such as age, gender, and education level.
Concerning the strengths, this study examined a linguistic aspect that has never been studied. It sheds light not only on the use of qad in the selected Saudi varieties, but also on the possible differences among the Saudi varieties (SVs). In addition, this study uncovers a pivotal linguistic aspect that has not attracted enough scholarly attention, that is, the relationship between Classical Arabic and Arabic in Saudi Arabia. Furthermore, with careful management, the designed questionnaire proved to be a reliable and valid tool for the current work. Finally, this study paves the way for future efforts to explore other similar aspects of Saudi varieties utilizing similar methods.

Findings
Quantitative analysis was used to examine the frequency of occurrence of the different reflexes of the particle qad in the selected Saudi Arabia varieties in various syntactic structures. Below is a detailed overview of the analysis of each syntactic structure and its frequency in each SV. This method of analysis helped to conduct a comparison among the selected SVs and uncovered the pattern of frequencies across Saudi Arabia.

Qad reflexes use in verbal sentences
The results presented in Table 2 are categorized according to the frequency (always, sometimes, never) of the use of qad in each regional variety (The percentages for the Southwestern region add up to 101% in total, because the results were rounded up). Table 2 that the frequency of the use of qad reflexes differs among speakers of the selected Saudi Arabic varieties. Of the Southwestern speakers, 54% indicated that they always used this particle in verbal sentences, whereas 39% and 36% of Najdi and Hijazi speakers, respectively, reported always using it. Interestingly, only 1% of Eastern speakers reported using it always, while 0% of Northern speakers reported always using it. In contrast to the results for always, the results of sometimes show that speakers of the selected varieties sometimes use qad reflexes almost equally. That is, 27%, 24%, 22%, 25%, and 29% of speakers from the Hijazi, Najdi, Southwestern, Northern, and Eastern regions, respectively, sometimes use qad reflexes. However, 75% and 70% of Northern and Eastern speakers, respectively, never use qad reflexes in their verbal sentences. In addition, 37% of Najdi and Hijazi speakers also never used qad reflexes in their verbal sentences, and only 25% of Southwestern speakers do the same. Table 3 shows the percentages of the use of qad reflexes in both tenses, i.e., past and present. In more detail, the speakers of the selected varieties use qad reflexes in the past tense differently, with two patterns evident. The Hijazi, Najdi, and Southwestern regions show one pattern, and the Northern and Eastern regions show another pattern. Among those who indicated that they always used qad reflexes, 33%, 28%, and 43% of Hijazi, Najdi, and Southwestern speakers, respectively, always used it in the past tense, whereas 0% of Northern and Eastern speakers indicated that they always did so. Among those who sometimes use it in the past tense, only 5% of Southwestern speakers indicated that they sometimes do, whereas 20% and 17%, respectively, of Eastern and Najdi speakers, sometimes do. Only 13% of Northern speakers and 11% of Hijazi speakers indicated that they sometimes do. Only 2%, 4%, and 7% of Southwestern, Najdi, and Hijazi participants, respectively, indicated that they never used it in the  past tense, whereas 37% and 30% of Northern and Eastern participants explained that they never used it in the past tense. Of those who reported always using qad reflexes in the present tense, 0% were Northern, 1% Eastern, 3% Hijazi, 11% Najdi, and 11% Southwestern speakers. Of those who reported never using it in the present tense, 40% were Eastern speakers and 37% were Northern. In addition, 30% of Hijazi and 33% of Najdi never used this particle in the present tense, while only 22% of Southeastern speakers never used it. These trends are clearly different from those of the past tense.

It is evident from
As noted earlier, the use of qad in verbal sentences is a common practice in both CA and SV. In SV, qad reflexes are often used in the past and present sentences. Below are illustrative examples of the verbal sentences provided by the participants: In Examples 5 and 6, qad is used in verbal sentences to indicate two meanings. That is, in Example 5, qad means "already," preceding the "participle" of a complex perfect tense to stress the past meaning. In Example 6, qad precedes an imperfect verb, which implies that an improbable event is possible. Here, qad expresses hope or expectations.

Qad reflexes use in nominal phrases (immediately preceding nouns)
The second syntactic structure is concerned with the use of qad reflexes in nominal phrases (i.e., nominal sentences, as they are known in Arabic). As noted earlier, in this syntactic structure, qad precedes the noun immediately. Table 4 presents three patterns of use. Of Hijazi and Southwestern speakers, 43% and 68%, respectively, reported that they always used qad reflexes in nominal phrases, whereas 17% of Najdi speakers indicated that they always used it. However, only 5% and 4% of Northern and Eastern speakers, respectively, reported that they always used it in nominal phrases. With reference to those who had never used qad reflexes in nominal phrases, Table 4 shows only two patterns. Of Hijazi and Southwestern speakers, 19% and 7%, respectively, reported that they had never used it. In contrast, 68%, 80%, and 81% of Najdi, Northern, and Eastern speakers, respectively, reported that they never used qad reflexes in nominal phrases. Interestingly, of the Najdi, Northern, and Eastern speakers, 15% of each group reported that they sometimes used qad reflexes in nominal phrases. Of the Hijazi and Southwestern speakers, 38% and 25%, respectively, reported that they sometimes used them.
As noted earlier, qad is not used or at least has not been documented as a particle that precedes a noun phrase in CA. On the other hand, the current data show that qad reflexes precede noun phrases in the selected SVs. The following are representative examples: (7) gid ʔabūk byitqāʕad min šuġlah w mā gid ʕindinā bēt.
PRT father.POSS.2SG FUT.retire.3SGM from job.POSS.3SGM and NEG PRT own.1PL house "Your father is almost retired, and we haven't owned a house yet." In Examples 7 and 8, qad preceded the nominal phrase to imply two meanings, namely, almost and already. In Example 7, gid preceded a noun phrase, ʔabūk byitqāʕad, to mean almost. On the other hand, in example 8, gid preceded the noun phrase, il-walad, to mean already. Table 5 shows the frequency of the use of qad reflexes in negation in the selected regional varieties.
In the selected data, the use of qad in negative statements was documented in the SVs with various frequencies. The examples below are illustrative: In Examples 9 and 10, the participants used qid in negation to imply that they have not done something. The negation particle used with qid is mā. This negative particle is the only particle commonly preceded qad in all SVs to negate the perfect tense. Some speakers of Southwestern variety used lis as a negative particle preceding gid. It should be noted that the negative particles used with qad are outside the scope of this study.  Table 6 shows the frequency of the use of qad reflexes in interrogatives in each regional variety.
With reference to interrogation, in SVs, it has been noted that qad reflexes are used in such a structure with various frequencies. The following are representative examples: In Examples 11 and 12, the participants used qad in interrogatives. It should be noted that the structure of these questions is similar to that of sentences with rising intonation.  "Is she about to finish?" In Examples 13 and 14, the participants used qad to enquire about specific actions in the perfect tense and an incomplete action, respectively.

Discussion
Understanding the changes in the use of qad reflexes enables linguists to outline the convergence and divergence occurrences of the studied varieties. Therefore, to examine the frequency of the use of qad reflexes per se, irrespective of whether this usage is always or sometimes, the percentages of the frequency of adverbs always and sometimes were combined to compare the results with those of never, as shown in Table 7 and Figure 1.
The variation in the percentages between always/sometimes used and never used is indicated by a line drawn between the percentages of used and not used. The lines for the studied regional varieties, shown in Figure 1, show zigzag patterns, indicating a sharp dissimilarity between the frequency of used and never used cases in terms of the four syntactic structures. The zigzag patterns for Hijazi and Southwestern speakers are quite similar, whereas those for Northern and Eastern speakers are parallel. It is worth noting that these two patterns always cross to illustrate opposite patterns. Interestingly, the Najdi zigzag pattern shows some instability. That is, at the very beginning, the pattern is similar to those of the Hijazi and Southwestern varieties of verbal sentences. However, in the middle, in the case of nominal phrases, the line descends and then rises again for the case of never in nominal sentences, to resemble the patterns for the Northern and Eastern varieties with reference to the nominal cases, negation, and interrogation. This might be due to the geographical location of the Najdi variety, which is central to the South, North, West, and East. It is worth noting that the patterns for the Southwestern and Hijazi varieties have the highest and lowest points in both cases, i.e., used and never, respectively. The frequency of the used case is higher in the Southwestern variety than in the Hijazi variety, and lower in the never case. The Northern and Eastern varieties have the lowest and highest points in the used and never cases, respectively. It is evident that the use of qad differs among Saudi varieties. It is highly used in the Southwestern variety, unlike the Northern variety. This large difference reveals the huge variance in qad reflexes between the South and North. It is hypothesized that qad, with its various syntactic uses, manifests in the dialects of Saudi Arabia most strongly in the South and fades gradually toward the North, as shown in Figure 2.
With reference to syntactic structures, as shown in Table 8, in the Southwestern and Hijazi varieties, the most frequent uses of qad reflexes are interrogatives and nominal phrases, with the least frequent uses being in verbal and negative sentences. Qad reflexes are most frequently used in interrogatives and verbal sentences in the Najdi, Eastern, and Northern varieties, with nominal phrases and negative sentences being least common. Some participants, especially those who speak the Northern and Eastern varieties, indicated that instead of qad they use other Arabic words, meaning "never" (to say "I have never"), to communicate the same meanings of qad. However, this phenomenon needs to be addressed in future studies.  Table 9 shows that the p-value of the t-test comparing the southwestern and Northern uses of qad reflexes is smaller than .05, which is statistically significant. Hence, the use of qad reflexes is strongly associated with regional varieties. As noted earlier, this feature appears in the Southwestern region and starts to weaken or may disappear in the Northern region of Saudi Arabia. It can be concluded, with high confidence, that the use of qad reflexes is an established linguistic feature of the Southwestern variety.
Comparing the use of qad in CA to that of the selected Saudi varieties, it is evident that there are pivotal differences and similarities. That is, the particle qad is used in verbal sentences in both CA and Saudi varieties. However, the particle qad in CA is not attested to in nominal phrases, negative phrases, and interrogatives, whereas they are used in Saudi varieties in the aforementioned cases. Although it is not possible to confirm with full reliability and certainty that this change is a divergence or convergence, it seems that qad, like many other Arabic linguistic features, is a case of divergence, expansion, and overgeneralization. The use of qad in CA, as Badawi et al., 2004) explain, is limited to verbal sentences, as documented in Arabic grammar reference books. Alternatively, the rich presence of qad reflexes in the Saudi Arabian spoken varieties suggests that the syntax of qad in CA might not have been documented completely. If this argument is to be better understood, further sociolinguistic studies are needed.
The limited use of qad in CA, which is the most prestigious variety, may have influenced the use of qad reflexes among the speakers of Arabic dialects because education is a social factor that has a strong effect on linguistic usage. Determining whether these differences indicate convergence or divergence is a challenging task. It would be useful to conduct a longitudinal study, taking age and gender into consideration as social factors, to uncover changes in the patterns of use of qad. The use of qad can represent the potential patterns of change that occur in Arabic varieties. Hence, the current study can be considered as a basis for future studies that aim to understand the pattern of chain shifts in Arabic regional varieties. It is not yet possible to determine whether a shift has occurred in the use of the qad reflexes. An apparent-time sociolinguistic study that considers age and education as social factors is needed. However, a real-time study will be useful despite the severe difficulties in observing these changes. Furthermore, qad is unlikely to be a newly transmitted feature. As shown above, qad reflexes, namely gid, gīd, jid, and dzid, are widely used in Saudi varieties, albeit at varying frequencies. Accordingly, it is pivotal to investigate this particle in other languages and varieties in the North and East of the Arabian Peninsula, such as Aramaic, Mehri, Harsusi, Kuwaiti, and Iraqi, to understand the patterns of change and historical developments.
Examining the syntactic use of qad in SVs will pave the way for the current research interest in SVs and provide guidelines for future studies on the particle qad. As noted earlier, functions and meanings are determined by syntactic use and the surrounding linguistic environments. Hopefully, surveying such aspects will encourage researchers to examine qad functions in SVs, considering various syntactic uses. In addition, this survey showed that Arabic varieties have different syntactic rules compared to those of CA, and because linguistic changes, it might be safe to say that Arabian varieties are richer and more diverse.

Conclusion
Compared to CA structures, this study concluded that qad reflexes are found in more syntactic structures with varying frequencies in Saudi varieties. The particle qad in the selected syntactic structures, i.e., verbal, nominal phrases, negation, and interrogation, are used in five main regional Saudi varieties, which represent the main Saudi regional dialects. The results showed that qad reflexes occurred more frequently in interrogatives, verbal sentences, nominal phrases, and negative sentences, respectively. It is highly used in Southwestern and Hijazi, moderately used in Najdi, and less used in Eastern and Northern varieties.  The rich presence of qad reflexes in Saudi Arabian spoken varieties suggests that the syntax of qad in CA might not have been fully documented. In addition, there is a lack of studies that compare linguistic features in CA and Arabic dialects and varieties. Thus, the present results were an attempt to bridge the gap that exists in the literature on the particle qad, which is considered one of the limitations of this study. To the best of the researchers' knowledge, the linguistic status reported herein has not been documented and, hence, is not discussed in the available literature. As a result, it is not possible to confirm whether this change is a divergence or convergence. To better understand the argument this study presents, more sociolinguistic studies need to be conducted to scrutinize the various uses of the particle qad.