The New Yorker blog has an online article by Elias Muhanna entitled "Translating 'Frozen' Into Arabic". What's noteworthy is that Disney's "Frozen" was translated into Modern Standard Arabic (MSA), while previous Disney releases were translated into Egyptian Arabic. Somewhat oddly, the author compares MSA vis-à-vis colloquial forms of Arabic with both King James Bible English / sportscaster English and Latin quatrains / hiphop French.
Nevertheless, Muhanna has some good points to make about vernaculars and diglossia, and deals with a variety of other interesting topics as well. The article also introduces us to the word "cryokinetic", which all "Frozen" freaks should learn posthaste.
While Muhanna calls Egyptian Arabic a "dialect", he later refers to both Arabic and Chinese as "diglossic language families" (though he also includes Hindi with them, which is surprising; one would have expected perhaps "Indo-Aryan" or "Indic").
What I find particularly intriguing about the juxtaposition of the Arabic and Chinese cases is that MSA is a very conservative, close to classical form of Arabic, whereas Modern Standard Mandarin (MSM) is among the most highly evolved of the vernacular forms of Sinitic.
We have had endless discussions about the "Mutual intelligibility" (with relevant posts listed toward the end) of the numerous Sinitic forms of speech and whether they should be called "dialects" or "languages". I wonder whether the diverse Arabic vernaculars are as mutually unintelligible as many of the Sinitic vernaculars are, and whether they should be thought of as dialects or separate languages.
Here are a couple of earlier Language Log posts that touched upon "Frozen" as presented in languages other than English:
[Thanks to Matt Anderson]