I am both a native English and native Arabic speaker. Having known both languages since early childhood, and having become proficient in the use of both, I would say that, along with other major differences, Arabic is more of an onomatopeic language than English. A simple example is "Maazah", or sheep. Maa is the sound sheep make, while sheep has nothing to do with with the actual characteristics of that particular animal species. "Sheep", however is phonetically similar to the word "shear", which is the act of cutting the wool away from sheep. I gave this example because it illustrates a difference between newer Western (Old English c. 550AD) and older Eastern (Arabic c. 500CE) languages. In newer languages, words tend to be born of relative object descriptors and functions (this is especially true in Germanic languages), whereas words from older languages tend to be born of feelings, expressions, and heard sounds. This illustrates a key divide in frame of reference between speakers of old and new languages. As the English language pervades much of the East today, these subtleties of native languages are being lost, though it is indeed debatable whether what is lost is the beauty without the loss of meaning. Many Eastern traditions view sounds as sacred objects in and of themselves, for example Mantras, which are thought to contain energy and information separate from yet entangled with the meaning of the words. In other words, a word is not just a symbol. Ancient theological texts from many cultures claim that the "word" predates creation, a fascinating proposition, even if you don't believe the stories and myths. If anything, it shows that words can indeed have special meaning to many people, meaning that extends beyond the boundaries of language.