A survey study on vietnamese university english majored students’ and teachers’ attitudes towards world englishes

In this study, in order to address the limitations of the questionnaire in exploring teachers‟ attitudes, focus group interviews will be used to elicit in-depth information about student

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

FACULTY OF POST - GRADUATE STUDIES

(Nghiên cứu khảo sát thái độ của sinh viên và giáo viên đại học chuyên ngữ ở

Việt Nam đối với các biến thể Tiếng Anh trên thế giới)

M.A MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS

Field : English Teaching Methodology Code : 60140111

HANOI - 2017

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

FACULTY OF POST - GRADUATE STUDIES

Việt Nam đối với các biến thể Tiếng Anh trên thế giới)

M.A MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS

Field : English Teaching Methodology Code : 60140111

Supervisor: Assoc Prof Dr Lê Văn Canh

HANOI - 2017

DECLARATION

I hereby certify that the thesis entitled “A SURVEY STUDY ON

VIETNAMESE UNIVERSITY ENGLISH MAJORED STUDENTS‟ AND TEACHERS‟ ATTITUDES TOWARDS WORLD ENGLISHES” is the result

of my research for the Degree of Master of Art, and the thesis has not been submitted for any degree at any other university or tertiary institution

In terms of these conditions, I agree that the origin of my paper deposited in the library should be accessible for the purposes of study and research, in accordance with normal conditions established by the librarian for the care, loan and reproduction of the paper

Hanoi, July 2017

Phạm Thị Hồng

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

It is an honor for me to express my gratitude to all who have helped me in the completion of this thesis

First of all, I would like to express my deepest thanks to my supervisor, Prof

Dr Le Van Canh, for his invaluable supervision, great support, persistent guidance, and timely encouragement I am truly grateful to his for the inspirable lectures, suggestions and materials for my research

At the same time, I would like to extend my sincere thanks to all the teachers

in Postgraduate Department of University of Language and International Studies for their precious lectures and suggestions

My heartfelt thanks and blessings also go to all teachers and students at Department of Foreign Languages, Ha Noi Pedagogical University Number 2 and USAcademy English Centre for their valuable information, assistance and cooperation in the completion of this study

Last but not least, I take this opportunity to thank my all family members, friends, especially my mother whose strong support, assistance and encouragement have helped me complete this research

To them all I dedicate this thesis

ABSTRACT

This survey study was aimed to find out the teachers‟ and students‟ attitudes towards World Englishes The purpose of this exploration is to gain an understanding of teachers‟ and students‟ attitudes towards WEs as well as how teachers‟ attitudes towards varieties of English are reflected in their classroom teaching Also, the study attempts to identify the gap between teachers' attitudes and their students' attitudes towards World Englishes Three instruments of data collection, audio recordings, questionnaires and interviews were used to achieve the purpose of the study The participants were teachers and students from English - major University in Viet Nam In this study, in order to address the limitations of the questionnaire in exploring teachers‟ attitudes, focus group interviews will be used to elicit in-depth information about students‟ and teachers‟ attitudes towards different varieties of English and factors that shape their attitudes

LISTS OF ABBREVIATION

EIL English as an International Language

ENL English as a native language

ESL English as a second language

SLA Second language acquisition

TESOL Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages ULIS University of Languages and International Studies VOICE Vienna-Oxford International Corpus of English

LISTS OF TABLES

Table 1 Students‟ attitudes towards non-native-English speakers‟ accents (N=150) 39Table 2 Students‟ opinions of the comprehensibility of various accents 40Table 3 Teachers‟ attitudes towards varieties of English (N=47) 43Table 4 Below shows the teachers‟ attitudes towards native-like pronunciation 44Table 5 Goals of pronunciation teaching to help students become as native-like as possible 45

LISTS OF FIGURES

Figure 1 Three components of attitude 6Figure 2: Kachru's (1985, 2004) circles of English (adapted from Graddol 2006: 110) 14Figure 3: The native speaker concept by Mukherjee (2005: 9) 15

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ii

ABSTRACT iii

LISTS OF ABBREVIATION iv

LISTS OF TABLES v

LISTS OF FIGURES vi

PART A: THE INTRODUCTION 1

1 The rationale of the study 1

2 Aim of study 2

3 Objectives 2

4 Research Questions 2

5 Scope 3

6 Research Methodology 3

7 Significance of the study 3

8 Design of the study 4

PART B: DEVELOPMENT 5

CHAPTER I: LITERATURE REVIEW 5

1.1 Definitions of Terminologies 5

1.2 Definition of World Englishes (WEs) 7

1.3 English as an international language (EIL) 9

1.4 English as a Lingua Franca 12

1.4.1 ELF and the English-speaking Community 12

1.4.2 ELF versus ENL and EFL 15

1.4.3 Research into ELF 17

1.5 English Language Teaching and ELF 20

1.5.1 Persistent Native Speaker Authority 20

1.5.2 Reforming ELT by ELF 22

1.6 Accent and ELF 24

1.6.1 What Is Accent? 24

1.6.2 Studies of Accent and Attitude (ELF) 26

1.7 Studies on students‟ and teachers‟ attitudes towards Wes 27

CHAPTER II: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 32

2.1 The context of the study 32

2.2 Research Questions 33

2.4 Research participants 34

2.5 Instruments for Data Collection 35

2.5.1 Audio recordings 35

2.5.2 Questionnaires 35

2.5.3 Interviews 36

2.6 Data Collection Procedures 37

2.7 Data Analysis Procedure 38

CHAPTER III: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 39

3.1 The student questionnaire data 39

3.2 The student interview data 41

3.3 Teachers‟ questionnaire data 43

3.4 Teachers‟ attitudes towards native-like pronunciation 44

3.5 Discussion 45

PART C: CONCLUSION 47

1 Summary of major findings 47

2 Implications 48

3 Limitations of the Study 50

REFERENCES Error! Bookmark not defined APPENDICES I

Appendix 1: I Appendix 2: IV

Appendix 3: V

PART A: THE INTRODUCTION

1 The rationale of the study

The discussion of World Englishes (WEs) in the applied linguistics profession for the most part accepts multiple varieties of English as legitimate and worthy of study even if legitimacy remains the object of inquiry Consistent with the value applied linguists place on World Englishes, English is taught and learned

in many countries because it is an and arguably the international language

A majority of English language users today have acquired English as an additional language (Graddol, 1997), and they use it as a medium of intranational and international communication, often in tandem with other languages With the growing understanding of the complexity of English, there has been an increasing interest in considering the pedagogical implications of WEs, defined inclusively to encompass not only the linguistic varieties but also the functional varieties of English

The first decade of the 21st century has witnessed rapid growth in the volume and quality of research on WEs Following Kachru‟s (1985) insight and his three circles model, scholars have described a growing number of varieties of English in terms of their structural characteristics and ecology (for reviews, see Bolton, 2005; Jenkins, 2006) Though the model has weaknesses, it has substantially raised general awareness of the existence and validity of dynamic varieties of English, each with growing populations of speakers and vibrant media, literatures, and popular cultures (Bolton, 2008) English as the language of international communication has for long been, and still is, spreading all over the world, and since any transmission of language brings about transformation (Widdowson, 2003), this spread has resulted in the existence of different varieties of English, each

as a consequence of English contact with a certain language, culture and people The interesting point is that the speakers of these new Englishes who use English to communicate with fellow non-native speakers far outnumber its native speakers

(Widdowson, 2003) The coinage and promotion of the term World Englishes is

mainly associated with Kachru (1982) The underlying philosophy of Kachruvian

approach argues for the "importance of inclusivity and pluricentricity in approaches

to linguistics of new varieties of English” (Bolton, 2004, p 367) In addition, in an

attempt to empower new Englishes, this theory calls the labels native speaker and native

and standard English into serious question and denies any special status for them

As a result, in order to narrow the gap between theory and practice, attempts have been made to explore teachers‟ and students‟ attitudes to WEs The survey study reported in this paper is aimed to explore the attitudes of teachers and students about WEs in the context of English – major University in Viet Nam In order to achieve this aim, I used questionnaire and interviewed a number of teachers and students at a English – major University in Viet Nam where English is taught as a compulsory subject about WEs The purpose of this exploration is to gain an understanding of teachers‟ and students‟ attitudes towards WEs as well as how teachers‟ attitudes towards varieties of English are reflected in their classroom teaching I believe that such as an understanding would be useful to curriculum designers, administrators and teacher educators to find more effective ways to make WEs really in the classroom by helping teachers and students to change their

attitudes if this is necessary

2 Aim of study

The study sets out to investigate students‟ and teachers‟ attitudes towards varieties

of English

3 Objectives

The purposes of the study are:

(a) to find out Vietnamese students‟ preferences to different English varieties

(b) to identify the gap, if any, between teachers‟ and students‟ attitudes towards varieties of English

4 Research Questions

The study is aimed at finding out the students‟ and teachers‟ attitudes towards World Englishes Therefore, it was designed and conducted to answer the following overarching research questions:

What varieties of English do teachers and students prefer?

In seeking the answer to the above general research question, the following sub-questions were formulated and answered with data gathered from the questionnaire and the interview

a What are the students‟ attitudes towards varieties of English?

b What shapes students‟ attitudes?

c What are the students‟ preferences for non - native – English speaking teachers?

d What are teachers‟ attitudes towards varieties of English?

5 Scope

The study limits itself to the investigation of teachers‟ and attitudes towards World Englishes in the context of English – major University in Viet Nam Particularly, the study was aimed at exploring what English varieties do students and teachers prefer as well as the students‟ attitudes towards native-English-speaking teachers and non-native-English-speaking teachers, and what shapes their attitudes

6 Research Methodology

employed to collect the data for the study and two main data collection methods employed were questionnaires, focus group interviews Specifically, a questionnaire will be administered to both teachers and students at English – major University first As Canh and Barnard (2009a) argue that “at best, eliciting teachers‟ attitudes through a questionnaire is barely scratching the surface of much deeper cognitive processes, but one which – it may be argued – is a necessary first step towards a more fully exploring cognitive processing (p.250) In this study, in order to address the limitations of the questionnaire in exploring teachers‟ attitudes, focus group interviews will be used to elicit in-depth information about students‟ and teachers‟ attitudes towards different varieties of English and factors that shape their attitudes

7 Significance of the study

It is hoped that this study will be of some use in understanding teachers‟ and students‟ attitudes towards World Englishes through a English – major University in Viet Nam The findings of the study will also contribute to my understanding of how

8 Design of the study

The thesis is composed of the following parts:

Part A, the Introduction, presents the rationale for the study, the aim, objectives,

research questions, scope of study, research methods, significance of the study and design of the study

Part B, the Development, consists of three chapters as follows:

Chapter I: the Literature Review, presents the theoretical background for the

study It involves definitions of attitudes, language attitudes, World Englishes, English as an International Language, English as a Lingua Franca, English Language Teaching and ELF, Accent and ELF, studies on students‟ and

teachers‟ attitudes towards WEs

Chapter II: the Study, presents the context of the study, research questions,

research participants, instruments for data collection, data collection procedures and data analysis procedure

Chapter III: the Results and Discussion, describes the results of the study

which were collected from questionnaires and interviews, and the discussion based in the results to answer the research questions

Part C: the Conclusion, gives the summary of major findings, implications,

limitations of the study

PART B: DEVELOPMENT CHAPTER I: LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter reviews the literature on WEs and teachers‟ and students‟ attitudes towards WEs First, it presents the main characteristics of the World Englishes (WEs), which followed by a discussion of the role of teachers‟ attitudes

in language teaching pedagogy

1.1 Definitions of Terminologies

Attitudes

Eagly and Chaiken (1993) defined attitude as „„a psychological tendency that is expressed by evaluating a particular entity with some degree of favor or disfavor‟‟ (p 1) According to Baker (1992, p 10), attitude is a hypothetical construct utilized

to expound the orientation and persistence of human behavior Attitude can be used

to predict behavior but it is hidden and potential and cannot be measured directly Therefore, attitude is a relatively constant system of evaluative processes towards

an object based on what individuals have learned in previous settings Even though attitudes are relatively constant in individuals, attitudes have been learned Since they are learned, they must be changed by further learning It is strongly likely that attitudes towards an object are not openly manifested but still measurable (Lemon,

1973, p 75, cited in Setiyadi,1999, p.41)

Attitudes are said to have cognitive, affective and conative components The cognitive component refers to the individual‟s belief structure, the affective to emotional reactions, and the conative to the tendency to behave toward the attitude

object (Gardner, 1985) The affective response is an emotional response that expresses an individual‟s degree of preference for an entity The behavioral

intention is a verbal indication or typical behavioral tendency of an individual The

cognitive response is a cognitive evaluation of the entity that constitutes an

individual‟s beliefs about the object” More interestingly, this source reveals that most attitudes result from either direct experience or observational learning from the environment.The relationship can be expressed in a hierarchy as shown below

Figure 1 Three components of attitude

In short, attitude is a mental state that expresses an individual‟s degree, like or dislike, positive or negative opinions about an object, a person, to thing or an event Additionally, it has three components: affective, cognitive, conative or behavioral

Language Attitudes

Learning a language is closely related to the attitudes towards the languages (Starks & Paltridge 1996: 218) In the Longman Dictionary of Applied Linguistics (1992:199) „language attitudes‟ are defined as follows:

The attitude which speakers of different languages or language varieties have towards each others‟ languages or to their own language Expressions of positive Nor negative feelings towards a language may reflect impressions of linguistic difficulty or simplicity, ease or difficulty of learning, degree of importance, elegance, social status, etc Attitudes towards a language may also show what people feel about the speakers of that language

Language attitudes play an important role in acceptance and understanding

of a particular accent The allusion from related studies to language and attitudes has shed some light on a significant effect on people‟s intelligibilities For example, Holmes (2008) indicates that people tend to understand better when they listen to speakers they admire Even though their attitude towards their admired speaker is important, the attitude towards variations of people‟s accent should also be on the spot Assuming that language and attitudes are closely connected (Meyerhoff, 2011), people‟s preferences might be one of the factors affecting intelligibility and comprehensibility of a particular English accent

Attitude

The attitude does not only show its bright side, but also it might be the barrier of language learning Al-Mansour‟s (2014) study showed that students with positive attitudes towards Arabic language showed better performance in terms of pronunciation and accent than those with negative attitudes

1.2 Definition of World Englishes (WEs)

According to Bhatt (2001), World Englishes paradigm discusses the global spread of English and the large number of functions it has taken on with increasing range and depth in diverse sociolinguistic settings around the world This paradigm particularly emphasizes on multilingualism, multicultural identities, multiple norms

of use, and bilinguals' creativity Moreover, having its theoretical and philosophical foundations in liberation linguistics, it severely problematizes the sacred cows of the traditional theoretical and applied linguistics including interference, interlanguage, native speaker, speech community, ideal speaker-hearer, Standard English, and traditional English canon

Davis (2004: 442), also, defined World Englishes as a term used to

“legitimate the Englishes spoken in the British non-white colonies” and explained that the ideology behind it denies a special status for the native speakers of metropolitan English varieties and complains about these native speakers' discriminations against users of world Englishes

World Englishes has its philosophical roots in the two dominant schools of thought of the present time, i.e., Postcolonialism and Postmodernism

Postcolonialism, according to Bressler (2007; 236), emerges from colonialization period in the 19th century when Great Britain was "the largest

Attitude

colonizer and imperial power" in the world But the political, social, economic and ideological domination of England gradually started to disappear by the turn of the century through a process called decolonization, which reached its peak in 1950 by the independence of India It was the birth of postcolonialism as a liberation movement The aim of postcolonialism is to destablize the stablized institutions and

in SLA, in particular, decolonizing the colonized ELT is its major concern Some of its common themes include national identity, universality, resistance, appreciation of differences, and protection of indigenous languages and cultures Postcolonialism is much similar to deconstructionism and postmodernism in its subjects and concerns

Postmodernism in philosophy refers to a belief in the death of metanarratives (universal truth or grand theories such as Nazism, Fascism, and Marxism) and claims that no one can ever find the ultimate truth (Pishghadam & Mirzaee, 2008) Contrary to modernism in which man is considered to bethe center of the universe and the ideas of “the best” and absoluteness are possible, postmodernism believes in a world with no center, i.e., everything is relative and “the best” and “the perfect” have

no place in it It also moves toward divergence by the appreciation of differences

There are different models of WEs but the one which best suggests the existence of Englishes, rather than one standard native English, is that of Kachru (1985) His model represents “the types of spread, the patterns of acquisition, and the functional domains in which English is used across cultures and languages” (Widdowson, 2003, p 34) This model describes the global situation of English in terms of three concentric circles (Bhatt, 2001; Mesthrie & Bhatt, 2008; Bolton, 2004; Kachru & Nelson, 1996; Timmis, 2007; Widdowson, 2003): The Inner Circle countries are the traditional bases of English where English is the primary or dominant language and is acquired as the mother tongue The U.S., Britain, Australia, Canada and New Zealand belong to this circle The Outer Circle includes countries with long history of colonization, where English has official and institutional functions and is used both as an intra and international language India, Nigeria and South Africa belong to this circle And finally, the Expanding Circle

comprises countries with increasing number of English speakers in which English is regarded as a foreign language and has no established social role in the community; yet, its functional domains are expanding rapidly It includes China, Iran, Japan and Korea

As mentioned earlier, the ideology of World Englishes calls the label native speaker into serious question and strongly denies a special status for it It specially opposes the prevailing view that native speakers are necessarily better at speaking English and hence they would make better English teachers (Jenkins, 2003) Moreover, it argues that since English is used for international communication and

is, thus, used among speakers from different nationalities, it simply makes no sense

to talk of its non-native speakers This argument gets even more powerful when one considers the ever increasing situations in which English is used as a lingua franca among its L2 speakers rather than between its L1 and L2 speakers

Representing this view, Jenkins (2003) listed some arguments against the use

of the term native and non-native speaker of English, including: its assuming monolingualism to be the world's norm while the majority of people are bi- or multilingual, its disregarding the lingua franca function of English, its being offensive for the proficient users of English to be labeled as non-native, and more importantly, by proposing a simplistic view of what constitutes error in English language use, its causing problems with the international English testing since it implies an irrelevant native standard reference point against which the users of all other varieties of English should be tested

1.3 English as an international language (EIL)

English is an international language, spoken in many countries both as a native and as a second or foreign language It is taught in the schools in almost every country on this earth It is a living and vibrant language spoken by over 300 million people as their native language Millions more speak it as an additional language

English is spoken habitually in the United States, the British Isles, Ireland, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the Republic of South Africa, Liberia, and many

territories under the United Kingdom and the United States of America It is estimated that 300 million people speak English as a second language, and an additional 100 million people use it fluently as a foreign language As a rough estimate, 1000 million or one billion people around the world have some knowledge

of English, either as a native language, as a second language, or as a foreign language English is the associate official language of India which has over 1000 million (over billion) people Pakistan, Bangladesh, and many other nations which were ruled by Britain continue to use English both as an optional medium of instruction in their schools and as one of their official languages The islands of the Philippines continue to use English as an important tool for education, administration, and for mass media purposes English is the chief foreign language taught in the schools of Europe, South America, Asia and Africa

Smith (1976) was one of the first to define the term “international language”, noting that an “international language is one which is used by people of different nations to communicate with one another” (p.38) In another research of Widdowson (1997, 139-140), he characterizes of EIL as follow:

English as an international language is not distributed as a set of established encoded forms, unchanged into different domains of use, but it

is spread as a virtual language….It is not a matter of the actual language being distributed but of the virtual language being spread and in the process being variously actualized The distribution of the actual language implies adoption and conformity The spread of virtual language implies adaptation and nonconformity …It spreads, and as it does, it gets adapted

as the virtual language gets actualized in diverse ways, becomes subject to local constraints and controls

Moreover, outside Europe, English is the predominant language of international commerce Although the United Nations and its various agencies have more than one language for transaction, more often than not, English comes to be chosen as the preferred language of communication between the participating

member-nations All this has happened within the last one hundred years The ascendancy of English as the most preferred language began two hundred years ago with the colonization of North America, Asia, and Africa by Britain The Industrial Revolution in Britain, its ever-expanding maritime power, development of material wealth, progress in scientific research and consequent power, all helped the spread

of English, even as Britain marched as a great empire In the Sixteenth Century, English was spoken mostly in England, southern Scotland, and small areas of Wales and Ireland There were only about two to three million people speaking it as their native language At present one in seven in this world speak English either as a native language or as a second language

According to Crystal (1997), more people use English today than have used any other language in the history of the world English is the international language

par excellence Estimates of the number of speakers are debatable Perhaps 380

million have English as a first language but more than a billion people use it as a second (or additional) language, largely to communicate with other second language users with whom they do not share a cultural and linguistic background Thus people from the so-called “core” English speaking countries are now in the minority among English users and “native speakers” of the language no longer determine how the language is being used internationally In a report commissioned by the British Council, Graddol (2006, p 11) observes that English now is “a new phenomenon, and if it represents any kind of triumph it is probably not a cause for celebration by native speakers”

Today, English is very much tied to globalisation and is profoundly affected

by all of its associated processes As Graddol (2006, p 66) puts it:

The English language finds itself at the centre of the paradoxes which arise from globalisation It provides the lingua franca essential to the deepening integration of global service-based economies It facilitates transnational encounters and allows nations, institutions, and individuals in any part of the world, to communicate their world view and identities Yet it is also the national

language of some of the most freemarket economies driving economic globalisation, and is often seen as representing particular cultural, economic, and even religious values

EIL tends to be conceptualized differently by different scholars: “paradigms

or perspectives” (McKay, 2002; Sharifian, 2009); “the function or use of English in international context” (Matsuda and Friedrich 2010); and “a variety of English” (Tomlinson, 2003; Widdowson 1997) Jenkins (2002: 85) makes a distinction between EFL and EIL EFL is to use English as a „foreigner‟ to communicate with native speakers and the purpose of learning EFL is to gain the near-native competence EIL, on the other hand, is to use English for international communication and the speakers are not „foreign‟ speakers, but „international‟ speakers of the language Their models of English and norms of its use are not British English and culture nor American English and culture alone The modern concept of EIL does not exist in isolation, but it has been evolved gradually in the history of English language Hence, it is helpful and necessary to review all theoretical paradigms related to EIL including World Englishes (WEs) paradigm, English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) paradigm as well as the relevance among these paradigms

1.4 English as a Lingua Franca

1.4.1 ELF and the English-speaking Community

English as a lingua franca has gradually been established as the main term of

what earlier was referred to, and occasionally still is, as English as an international

language, English as a global language, or English as a world language (Seidlhofer

2004: 210) This variety of terms suggests that scholars have been aware of the global use of English for a long while now The varied terminology also suggests that the approaches to the phenomenon of global English have been diverse, even conflicting: some linguists have treated ELF as a legitimate variety in its own right, while others have doubted its relevance to the study of the English language in the first place The stance of the present study towards ELF is congruent with the

former view, and from the many options, English as a lingua franca has been

chosen as the main term

Today, the majority of ELF users are nonnative speakers inside and outside

English-speaking countries (Llurda 2004: 320), so that as the term lingua franca implies, ELF is “an additionally acquired language system that serves as a means of communication between speakers of different first languages” (Seidlhofer 2001:146) As a consequence, in a sense, there are no native speakers of ELF This does not mean that ELF would be a restricted pidgin language: ELF is used in countless, often influential domains, which leads to a great deal of linguistic variation and presumes elaboration (ibid.) Diversity, in turn, does not mean that ELF would be incomprehensible: diversity of linguistic backgrounds, uncertainty of shared knowledge, and potential misunderstandings can be tackled by special kinds

of communication skills, such as various (proactive) clarification and repair

strategies, which often promote intelligibility among ELF speakers (Mauranen

2006: 147)

In the 1980s, Kachru (1985) launched a useful description of the spread of English by dividing the English-speaking community into three concentric circles: the inner circle, the outer circle, and the expanding circle (see the left-hand circle in Figure 2, in which the numbers refer to English speakers in millions) The inner circle includes those English-speaking countries where the language serves as a native language (ENL), for example the UK and Australia The outer circle refers to countries which have experienced periods of colonisation by English-speaking communities, and the language has thereby been institutionalised in these nonnative communities Examples are India, Nigeria and Singapore, where people use English

as a second language (ESL) The expanding circle, for its part, includes countries where English is used as a foreign language (EFL), for instance in China, Israel and Finland As the outer and the expanding circles share many characteristics, their clear-cut separation is not always simple (Kachru 1985: 13-14)

Figure 2: Kachru's (1985, 2004) circles of English (adapted from Graddol 2006: 110)

Since the 1980s, this division into three circles has become increasingly problematic: the neat concepts of ENL, ESL and EFL have become blurred in the globalised world (Graddol 2006: 110) Kachru himself has suggested another kind

of circle (see the right-hand circle in Figure 1) in which the inner circle in the core now represents highly proficient speakers of English - native or nonnative - and the former outer and expanding circles have merged into a community of less proficient users (Kachru 2004) This depicts the nature of ELF better: ELF concerns all the users of English, the whole community of English speakers, including natives (Seidlhofer 2004: 210) However, since Kachru's original circles are still feasible in many ways as well as still frequently in use in discussions of the spread of English,

I refer to them in this study occasionally, bearing in mind that an alternative abstraction of global English speakers exists Anyhow, if we are to see ELF as a legitimate language variety, it is important to consider how it differs from the native language of the inner circle, and the foreign language of the expanding circle

1.4.2 ELF versus ENL and EFL

According to Mukherjee (2005), the concept of native speaker can be understood in various ways (see Figure 3): there are linguistic (dividing into usage-based and usage-independent definitions) and non-linguistic (dividing into attitudinal and ideological definitions) approaches as well as differences in whether

we are dealing with an abstract concept or with actual language users If the native speaker is seen non linguistically, that is the status of a native speaker is seen stemming from the birthright, then Seidlhofer's view is reasonable: ELF is not ENL simply because nonnative speakers cannot become members of the native speaker community through education, “no matter how hard they try, no matter how long they study” (2001: 136) However, if we see the native speaker purely in linguistic terms, that is “nativeness is a matter of linguistic competence which is mirrored in

language use” (Mukherjee 2005: 11), then a nonnative speaker can become a native

speaker provided that he or she reaches a native-like proficiency in lexicogrammaticality, acceptability and idiomaticity (ibid.)

Figure 3: The native speaker concept by Mukherjee (2005: 9)

abstract concept of a

prototypical linguistic model

(=> native-speaker norm)

reference to individual, actual language users

(=> native speaker)

usage - independent definition

attitudinal definition ideological definition

„native speaker‟

usage - based

definition

Even if nativeness was seen in linguistic terms, reaching that level among nonnative speakers is exceptional; in practice, it is reasonable to distinguish ELF from ENL Further, linguistic competence is not the only issue here It is perhaps even more important to understand that native-speaker norms do not necessarily hold true with successful ELF interaction by multilingual speakers; “ELF talk cannot be conceived with a view to an ideal English norm, and the ELF speaker cannot be measured in his/her competence visà- vis „the native speaker‟” (House 2003: 557) Indeed, if native-speaker norms do not improve ELF communication, there is little sense to prioritise them (Jenkins 2006: 140) Thus ELF is a feasible and acceptable alternative to ENL; it is a variety that also native speakers of English need to learn and adapt to (Jenkins 2000: 227; Llurda 2004:320)

Though it is easy to confuse ELF with EFL both as abbreviations and as concepts, these two are not the same thing either One of the principal differences between them is what is considered an error As the goal of foreign language learning is near-native competence - the expanding circle is expected to conform to the inner circle (Seidlhofer 2004: 213) - any deviations from that are errors, whereas

in ELF contexts the same „errors‟ can be regarded as different variants (Jenkins 2006: 141) This is not to say that in ELF interaction any kind of language use is acceptable: language use that results in communication breakdown, for example due

to inadequate pronunciation skills, can be considered an error Thus, we can find a range of proficiency levels not only among English learners, but also among ELF users (ibid.)

The distinction between learner English and ELF also relates to the identities

of English speakers Most ELF users have been English learners first Nonetheless,

at some point, nonnative English speakers may want to dissociate themselves from the identity of an eternal learner, and associate themselves with a more convenient identity of an ELF user, corresponding better to their actual contexts and purposes

of language use Many communities may benefit from the divorce between ELF and

EFL, specifically nonnative teachers of English worldwide: the separation moderates the inequality between native and nonnative teachers by offering another identity option besides the learner or the fossilised user (Jenkins 2006: 143)

1.4.3 Research into ELF

Although scholars have been interested in the spread of English, and for instance the developments in the outer circle for a couple of decades, specific research into ELF has not started to accumulate until the turn of the millennium (Mauranen and Metsä-Ketelä 2006) Research into ELF complements both ENL and EFL research, and it is not designed to replace either (Seidlhofer 2001: 145); specific ELF research is needed if it is understood as a variety on its own Nonetheless, according to Jenkins (2006: 150), many SLA researchers have stuck to interlanguage theories irrelevant to ELF, and cognitive-mentalistic orientation has dominated at the expense of socialcontextual approach which would often be more fruitful in ELF contexts Further, SLA scholars often have monolingual bias (ibid.: 152), whereas the nature of ELF interactions is multilingual by necessity

Despite the varied approaches, ELF research has gradually established itself during the 21st century Studies have been carried out mainly on spoken data since language changes can be detected most easily in its spoken form; written language changes much more slowly, but a written variety of ELF appears to be evolving as well (Seidlhofer 2004: 223) The scope of research has been limited by the level of language, the linguacultural background of the interlocutors, and the domain (ibid.: 215) Linguists have been particularly interested in such ELF regions as East and South Asia and Europe, taking a wide range of L1 backgrounds on board (ibid.: 221) Many scholars have worked on pragmatics of ELF; interest in lexicogrammar, metadiscourse and discourse organisation has also grown recently (Mauranen and Metsä-Ketelä 2006: 3) On the societal level, the number of ELF attitude studies, concentrating mainly on attitudes among teachers and learners, have been growing

in recent years, and the general academic interest in language and identity (Jenkins 2007: 199) has also spread into the field of ELF

Since descriptions and reference works seem to be the precondition for a wholehearted acceptance of ELF (Seidlhofer 2004: 215), devoted codifying is going

on in consequence The VOICE (Vienna-Oxford International Corpus of English) project supervised by Barbara Seidlhofer (VOICE website), and the ELFA (English

as a Lingua Franca in Academic Settings) project supervised by Anna Mauranen (ELFA website), offer corpora for solid ELF description, the former providing a more general picture, and the latter focusing on ELF in academic settings The first international conference of English as a lingua franca, the ELF Forum (ELF Forum website), was organised in March 2008 at the University of Helsinki, bringing all the different domains of ELF research together

The findings of ELF research have helped describe and define the characteristics of ELF as a variety The groundbreaking study has been Jenkins‟ (2000) research into the phonology of ELF: she examined which pronunciation

„errors‟ lead to intelligibility problems in ELF communication and which do not Based on her results, Jenkins suggested a Lingua Franca Core arguing that an ability

to imitate a native-speaker variety precisely is not crucial; instead, accommodation skills have a critical role Studies of ELF pragmatics, for their part, have indicated that in ELF communication, misunderstandings are not particularly frequent, interference from L1 interactional norms is rare, and the interaction appears to be consensus-oriented, cooperative, and mutually supportive (House 2002; Seidlhofer 2004; Mauranen 2006) Finally, lexicogrammatical studies have shown that typical

EFL errors, such as omitting the third person -s, mixing the relative pronouns who and which, using articles inconsistently, simplifying tags, using prepositions freely,

overusing verbs with generic sense, and overdoing explicitness, do not necessarily

hinder ELF interaction Instead, metaphorical language, idioms, phrasal verbs and fixed ENL expressions may do so (Seidlhofer 2004: 220)

The discussion of WEs has also raised questions about teaching and teacher education One could ask what kind of English or which English should be taught in the Expanding Circle If we are teaching Turkish students to use English well in an educational institution in the USA, the best answer will be American English, but if

we have the aim of allowing our students to communicate across cultures, then we should teach English so that they will be able to understand/tolerate many accent and varieties through exposure Awareness should be created and cross-cultural communication strategies should be studied It is of utmost importance for teachers

to develop a greater tolerance of differences and adjust their expectations according

to the settings They should be informed about the varieties and provided with the opportunities to collaborate with other teachers in all three circles However, what matters most seems to be the intelligibility of the uses of English in different countries or regions, not just in national boundaries This can be achieved through the publishers in all over the world, providing World Englishes and ELF perspectives in their books, materials, and more importantly in their practices of language testing and assessment

Summarising the ELF chapter, the main points significant to this study are, first, that English as a lingua franca is a spoken, dynamically evolving variety of English extending over all Kachru's circles, thus concerning both nonnative and native speakers of English Second, even though some exceptional nonnative speakers may be able to reach linguistic native-speaker competency in English, ELF can be distinguished from ENL, as well as from learner English Third, the scientific approaches to ELF have been varied, and the research into it is in comparatively early stages In the following chapter, I will discuss the controversial relationship between ELF and English language teaching

1.5 English Language Teaching and ELF

1.5.1 Persistent Native Speaker Authority

The ideas of Communicative Language Teaching with the goal of communicative competence have dominated ELT over thirty years The concept of communicative competence can be divided into four competences: grammatical, sociolinguistic, discourse and strategic From the perspective of ELF, the principal problem with communicative competence is that its linguistic and social goals are ultimately constructed on the native speaker model; “learning a foreign language becomes a kind of enculturation, where one acquires new cultural frames of reference and a new world view, reflecting those of the target language culture and its speakers” (Alptekin 2002:58) Applying this to the English language with global spread over multitude of cultures seems unfeasible: “any attempt to define the cultural context of the language is inherently an attempt to promote one English speaking community's culture at the expense of others” (Modiano 2001: 161) In addition to the difficulty of choosing a politically correct native target culture, enculturation may also influence identities in a harmful way

Another problem apart from the failure to recognise and appreciate nonnative English-speaking communities is that the native speaker model behind the concept

of communicative competence is often idealised In other words, there is “tendency

to assume that there is an almost hard-wired relationship between the status of being

a native speaker of a language and a complete knowledge of and about that language … and that all native speakers share the same knowledge” (Leung 2005: 130) Of course, such universal native-speaker competence does not exist; linguistic knowledge as well as competence definitely vary also among native speakers Yet the notion of the idealised native speaker - carrying economic, social and symbolic power - has been deeply integrated in language theorising, description, and teaching (Seidlhofer 2004: 212; Leung 2005: 128)

Any kind of standard language - as often the model in ELT as the idealised native speaker - is an abstraction, too Standard language maintenance, which is common in many countries, has admittedly some benefits, too: promoting a standard, native variety is often justified for example by clear communication and intelligibility (Widdowson 1994: 379) It has also been argued that standard native English is the only variety which can bring liberty to all English users and learners (Quirk 1990) It is worth noting, however, that standard English is essentially a written variety, which is mainly used for institutional purposes, such as education, administration, and business (Widdowson 2003: 38) ELF, in contrast, is essentially

a spoken variety, whose standards and norms are much more difficult, and often even unnecessary, to regulate Another point of concern here is the traditional authority of the standard chosen for ELT: a self-elected, educated native minority, a kind of “exclusive club” (Widdowson 1994: 379) As Widdowson puts it, “standard English, then, is not simply a means of communication but the symbolic possession

of a particular community, expressive of its identity, its conventions, and values” (ibid.: 381) This educated minority represents gatekeepers to nonnative speakers, and often also to uneducated natives

The native speaker authority is also reflected in the dichotomy between native and nonnative teachers On a global scale, nonnative teachers of English have traditionally been on the losing side in comparison since professional expertise, native-speakerness (Leung 2005: 129) as well as the notion of authenticity (Widdowson 1994: 387) have privileged native teachers Nonnative teachers have nonetheless several advantages over native teachers, and over monolingual native teachers in particular: nonnative teachers “know the target language as a foreign language, share with their students the experience of what it is like to try and make

it their own, often through the same first language/culture „filter‟, and can represent relevant role models for learners” (Seidlhofer 2001: 134-135) In other words, nonnative teachers are usually both competent speakers (informants) and competent

pedagogues (instructors) of the target language by knowing the process of foreign language learning, and knowing the students' L1 (Seidlhofer 1999: 236- 237; Llurda 2004: 318) Thus, regarding nonnative teachers as inferior to natives is groundless, particularly as to ELF interaction

1.5.2 Reforming ELT by ELF

Many ELF speakers are mislead by the prevailing - and often mixed - ideologies of nativeness and standard language (Jenkins 2006: 143), but those who have recognised the legitimacy of ELF and the nativised varieties of English have seriously questioned native speakers' “ownership of English” (Widdowson 1994) and standard native language both generally and in ELT for many reasons

Perhaps the most obvious reason for opposing to native speaker authority is the fact that nonnative and nativised speakers clearly outnumber native speakers of English worldwide (House 2002: 244) One estimation is that there are between 320-380 million ENL speakers, 300-500 million ESL speakers, and about 500-1000 million EFL speakers in the world (Crystal 2003); these numbers of ESL and EFL speakers simply cannot be ignored in ELT Secondly, the irrelevance of standard native models has been recognised in ELF communication; native - like production

is often not only unrealistic but also unnecessary - or even counterproductive - for nonnative speakers in intercultural communication (Jenkins 2006:143) The same holds true with native patterns of cultural behaviour (Widdowson1994: 387; Llurda 2004: 319), which are surely irrelevant in nonnative-nonnative communication Thirdly, superior native-speaker ideals in ELT have been questioned because the exhaustive linguistic competence of native speakers is a myth, and native-speaker English is thus not less varied than that of nonnative speakers' (Widdowson 1994: 383)

One factor promoting the image of the infallible native speaker has been the dominant SLA discourse which portrays L2 learning as “a never-ending elusive quest for NS competence” (Pavlenko 2003: 259), suggesting that the learner is

somehow „at fault‟ when he or she is unable to acquire fully an L2 (Marx 2002: 277) The emergence and recognition of ELF is gradually changing this view: the target in ELT should be the successful multilingual speaker of ELF instead: “the yardstick for measuring ELF speakers' performance should be an „expert in ELF use‟” (House 2003: 573)

ELF is likely to influence ELT in many ways in the course of time: it may affect teacher education, curriculum design, textbooks, assessment, and how English is taught for intercultural, lingua franca communication (Alptekin 2002; Seidlhofer 2004) One of the main reasons for not adopting ELF for teaching so far has been the absence of descriptive work; it has been premature to make detailed pedagogical suggestions (Seidlhofer 2004: 225-226; Jenkins 2007: 238) In a sense, ELT is going through a postmodern phase: “old forms and assumptions are rejected, but no new orthodoxy can be offered” quite yet (Seidlhofer 2004: 228) This state of affairs is, however, quickly changing as ELF corpora are busily compiled and examined Still, the main source of resistance seems to be the deep-rooted native speaker authority: many native and nonnative speakers object to ELF due to prejudice, vested interests, cultural sensibilities, or by aesthetic arguments (Seidlhofer 2001: 151)

There have already been many suggestions for revising ELT in order to match the reality and the needs of the majority of English speakers better For instance, Leung (2005) has brought up the issue of recontextualising the concept of communicative competence, Llurda (2004) has reconsidered the role of nonnative teachers in the profession of ELT, Lowenberg (2002) has talked about the changes

in assessment in the expanding circle, and Alptekin (2002) has compiled a new pedagogic model, which takes into account both the local and global needs of intercultural English speakers McKay (2002) has also suggested a theory of teaching and learning English as an international language The theory caters for crosscultural and multilingual communities, questions native speaker models, and

recognizes the status of local varieties of English; intelligibility comes before correctness, and intercultural strategies are needed to promote politeness Fostering textual competence would still be important The fact that ELF is a highly diverse language variety - simply because lingua franca language always adapts to changing circumstances (Joseph 2004: 186) - must be taken into account in ELT Coping with diversity is a question of awareness, sensitivity and accommodation skills which could and should be integrated in ELT

Finally, it must be underlined that in any language education learner choice

is essential, particularly with adult learners However, the choice between the targets of ELF or native varieties “needs to be made in full knowledge of the sociolinguistic facts and without pressure from the dominant native speaker community” (Jenkins 2006: 155) Nonnative teachers should also think over their teaching target and practices in the light of ELF

1.6 Accent and ELF

1.6.1 What Is Accent?

Accent is an integral part of spoken language In this study, the term accent

means, as defined by Lippi-Green, a “loose bundle of prosodic and segmental features distributed over geographic and/or social space” (1998: 42) Prosodic features include intonation, pitch, stress and tempo, and segmental features the phonological structure of vowels and consonants Simply put, an accent is a way of speaking, and every single speaker of a language has it

In terms of nonnative speakers, accent is usually used to refer to the

breakthrough of native language phonology into the target language (Lippi-Green 1998: 43) In fact, children are born with the ability to produce the entire set of possible sounds, but eventually restrict themselves to the ones they hear used

around them (Lippi-Green 1998: 46; Marx 2002: 276) Consequently, there is a sensitive period in learning L2 sounds: in order to gain a native-like accent, the

550) Thus, adult learners who acquire a second language will usually retain a

„foreign‟ accent This is not always the case, but “foreign accents in general are very hard to avoid for most NNSs” This has also to do with the fact that accent appropriation is influenced by neurobiological and language access constraints as well (Marx 2002: 277)

In traditional ELT, the „intrusive‟ L1 accent is regarded negatively, as

something in need to get rid of ELF ideology sees accented speech differently, however Since accent can be reduced, but not removed (Lippi-Green 1998: 50), there is no sense in striving for a perfectly native-like accent The main argument for this is that, as Jenkins' research among others has indicated, native-like accent is not the deciding factor in successful ELF communication, according to the principle

of intelligibility This leads us to the conclusion that the degree of accentedness cannot predict the level of competence in the target language (Lippi-Green 1998: 70)

Instead of near-native accent, accommodation skills, such as flexible listening skills, as well as cultural sensitivity are crucial in fluent ELF communication (Seidlhofer 2004: 222) The main reason for this is variation: spoken language is characteristically subject to variation at every level, and phonology is the greatest potential for variation since different speakers have different „sound systems‟ (Lippi-Green 1998: 26) Accordingly, as phonology is a comparatively closed system, in practice all ELF users speak the language with some trace of their L1 accent (Seidlhofer 2004: 215), turning the range of ELF accents extremely diverse Lippi-Green talks about mutual responsibility: “when speakers are confronted with an accent which is foreign to them, the first decision they make is whether or not they are going to accept their responsibility in the act of

communication” (1998: 70) This concerns both nonnative and native speakers of

English In ELT, interlocutors' mutual responsibility should be acknowledged, and learners' accommodation skills should be developed in order to be ready to meet English speakers with unfamiliar accents

1.6.2 Studies of Accent and Attitude (ELF)

Accents have been a popular research objective in many fields, such as social psychology and applied linguistics, for decades (Derwing 2003: 548) Along with describing the characteristics of different accents, scholars have been interested in related sociocultural aspects Thus, literature on English language attitudes and English accent attitudes has been plentiful; scholars have looked into attitudes towards regional native-speaker accents and nonnative-speaker accents, and both native and nonnative speakers‟ perceptions (Jenkins 2007: 65)

As an interlocutor's accent tells a lot to its hearer, people tend to hold biases with regard to accented speech; “the further the accent is from their own, the more likely they are to experience a negative reaction to it” (Derwing 2003: 548-549) Accordingly, studies, using for instance matched guise technique or questionnaires, have shown that native speakers of English are usually evaluated more positively compared to regional English accents, not to speak of nonnative accents Interestingly, nonnative speakers' perceptions tend to be even harsher in this than natives, and their attitudes are unfavourable also towards the accent of their own L1 group (Jenkins 2007: 89) Nonnative accents have often been blamed for their supposed unintelligibility, but as Jenkins remarks, the research design and methods may have been too prompting in some of the studies indicating this (ibid.: 83) In any event, numerous accent studies have also suggested that prosody has more importance to overall comprehensibility than segments (Derwing 2003: 560)

As is the case with ELF identity studies, the number of ELF attitude studies has started to grow in recent years The participants have often been either practising teachers, pre-service teachers, or learners of English - that is the perspective has been that of applied linguistics - and most of the studies have focused explicitly on accents or pronunciation (Jenkins 2007: 93) More often than not, the participants' perceptions have been to some extent contradictory, ambiguous and/or biased

To mention some accent-related ELF attitude studies, for instance Timmis (2002) questionnaire study, surveying teachers and students in over 45 countries, indicated that particularly students of English want to hold on to native norms, also

in terms of pronunciation Derwing (2003), in turn, examined Canadian immigrants' attitudes to their own accents, and found out that unimportant segmental units are often thought to be the reason for communication problems with a foreign accent, and that the participants had experienced discrimination and felt inferior because of their accents (Derwing does not deal with ELF as such, but the study can also be applied to ELF contexts) Further, Sifakis and Sougari‟s (2005) study indicated that Greek teachers' pronunciation beliefs and practices are bound to native norms, and

in general, they are little aware of the uses of English as an international language Jenkins (2007) questionnaire study, eliciting the views of English teachers worldwide, suggested that native accents are still preferable to

nonnative accents in every way, and that nonnative accents are ranked hierarchically, the least preferable being the ones farthest away from native accents

I clarified what is meant by accent in this study and pointed out accents‟ tendency to raise biases I also explained the alternative ways to regard

foreign, or nonnative, accent of English: in traditional ELT, foreign accent has automatically been seen as a demerit, while in ELF, foreign accent is a natural sign

of variation - just as native accents are - and not problematic unless it causes frequent communication breakdowns Proponents of ELF emphasise the mutual responsibility to accommodate one's speech due to the diversity of both native and nonnative accents of English

1.7 Studies on students‟ and teachers‟ attitudes towards Wes

As one of the first studies on attitudes of learners toward World Englishes, the dissertation work of Matsuda (2000) on attitudes of Japanese students toward

the English language has been broadly cited in other studies and discussions The study revealed that on one hand, the students perceived English as an international language; on the other hand, they believed that English belonged to and was owned

by native English speakers Therefore, the researcher concluded that - much sociolinguistic instruction for English learners and teachers is necessary in order to prepare students adequately for the future uses of English as an International Language (p 495) For learners, she proposed

meta-that exposure to different forms and functions of English is crucial; and for teachers, she promoted a more World Englishes perspective in their teaching methods and materials Jenkins (2007) further explained that - such instruction needs to provide plenty of scope for reflection and probably also the opportunity for contact with ELF speakers with other L1s, and discussion of sources of information other than those found in the classroom that may influence students„ views (p 104)

With regard to the concept of World Englishes, accent perception of language learners has been a keenly-debated topic in recent years Riney, Takagi and Inutsuka (2005) reported a study on English accent perception of Japanese listeners (Non-Native Speakers) and American listeners (Native-Speakers), with reference to phonetic parameters The study showed that the NNS Japanese listeners used primarily nonsegmental parameters, such as intonation, fluency, and speech rate to make perceptual judgments; whereas NS American listeners relied more upon segmentals (especially /r/ and /l/) In other words, NS and NNS listeners of English may make judgment on accent in fundamentally different ways The researchers made suggestions for phonological syllabus design coping with the NNS-NNS interactions, by highlighting the importance of nonsegmental factors, such as intonation, stress, fluency, and speech rate to achieve intelligibility

A number of studies have been conducted to investigate students‟ and teachers‟ attitudes towards WEs Studies looking at the attitudes of learners of