926715
research-article2020
REL0010.1177/0033688220926715RELC JournalBoonsuk and Fang
Article
RELC Journal
Perennial Language Learners
–55
2022, Vol. 53(1) 40
© The Author(s) 2020
Article reuse guidelines:
or Competent Language sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/0033688220926715
https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688220926715
Users: An Investigation journals.sagepub.com/home/rel
of International Students’
Attitudes towards Their Own
and Native English Accents
Yusop Boonsuk
Prince of Songkla University, Thailand
Fan Fang
Shantou University, Guangdong, China
Abstract
English is widely used as a global language. The traditional monolithic model of English has been
challenged as the development of World Englishes (WE) and English as a lingua franca (ELF)
paradigms challenge the ownership of English. With this newly emerging status quo, English
language teaching (ELT) should also recognize the diversity and dynamism of English. This article
discusses students’ attitudes towards their own and native English accents, and describes the
influence of English accents in ELT. Data were collected using semi-structured interviews with
nine international students from Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Malaysia, and Sri Lanka who were
studying at a university in Southern Thailand. The derived data were analysed using qualitative
content analysis. The findings revealed that most students still perceived their accents as being
deficient, and they believed that native speakers’ English accents were the norm of English use
and the ultimate learning goal. Thus, entrenched native ideology was still persistent among these
students. The article also provides some implications for pronunciation teaching from a WE and
ELF framework with the Teaching of Pronunciation for Intercultural Communication (ToPIC). It is
hoped that an awareness of English as a global language could be recognized, and ToPIC could be
applied to ELT in more contexts to reflect the global status of English.
Corresponding author:
Fan Fang, Department of Foreign Languages & Literature, College of Liberal Arts, Shantou University, 243
Daxue Road, Shantou, Guangdong, 515063, China.
Email: [email protected]
Boonsuk and Fang 41
Keywords
Accent attitude, English as a lingua franca, English language teaching, international students,
pronunciation, World Englishes
Introduction
English should no longer be considered a language owned by its native speakers
(Widdowson, 1994); rather, it has been nativized and localized in various contexts. The
word English, as a singular noun, has evolved into its plural form, Englishes, because of
the different varieties that are used by people around the world. Moreover, because the
number of non-native speakers of English (NNSE) has now surpassed the number of
native speakers of English (NSE)1 (Crystal, 2012; Kirkpatrick, 2012), scholars of World
Englishes (WE) and English as a lingua franca (ELF) have argued that it is necessary to
discuss the various motivations for learning and speaking English and to legitimize the
innovation of the English language in various contexts (Fang, 2020; Galloway, 2017;
Jenkins, 2007). However, in many contexts, English language teaching (ELT) does not
reflect these proposals. Many policymakers and language practitioners still believe the
standard English ideology that the ‘best’ English still belongs to the native speakers.
However, this does not reflect the current linguistic landscape as the English language is
more often used among NNSE.
Because English is used as a global language, different varieties have emerged due to
the influences of diverse speaker groups with different mother tongues. Consequently,
many currently spoken English varieties differ from the ones used by the language’s
native speakers, especially in terms of accents (Jenkins, 2007; Lippi-Green, 2012;
McKenzie, 2010). In the Asian context, English has been utilized as a lingua franca and
a primary communicative tool for interactions within the Association of Southeast Asian
Nations (ASEAN) (Baker, 2015; Kirkpatrick, 2010). With these mixed communicative
encounters, ASEAN citizens are often exposed to diverse English-speaking interlocu-
tors. As English is the mandatory official working language of ASEAN, most of the
communicative encounters occur among ASEAN members. When English is used by
NNSE, accent is one of the salient features that people are exposed to (Jenkins, 2007).
Although the concept of an English accent has been broadly explored and discussed by
many scholars in the inner-, outer-, and expanding-circle countries (Lippi-Green, 2012;
McKenzie, 2010; Moyer, 2013), ‘the impact of accent on communication is still poorly
understood [. . .] [as] we have not sufficiently contextualized the relevance and scope of
accent’ (Moyer, 2007: 502).
Through the paradigms of WE and ELF, it is worth investigating how language
users regard their own English accents when learning this language and communicat-
ing with people from different lingua cultures (Fang, 2020; Jenkins, 2007). Therefore,
this article discusses students’ attitudes towards their own English accents, in particu-
lar to understand the extent to which they believe if their accents or native speakers’
accents are more useful or important. It also aims to unpack how they regard their own
English accents and the accents they aspire to. Consequently, this article aims to
explore if the notion of WE or ELF has been applied in ELT, and to what extent the
students regard themselves as perennial language learners or competent language users
42 RELC Journal 53(1)
while learning English. It is hoped that this will shed some light on future ELT from
the WE and ELF paradigms.
Literature Review
Language Attitude
Garrett stated that ‘an attitude is an evaluative orientation to a social object of some sort,
whether it is a language, or new government policy, etc’. (2010: 20). It briefly provides
social environment insights (e.g. the opinions of others) reflecting the intrinsic forces
that push ‘individuals to accomplish his/her preferred aims and escape undesirable
results’ (Fabrigar et al., 2005: 82). More specifically, theories about language attitude
describe the term as the feelings individuals have towards their own languages or the
languages of others, and this is a predictive factor for a language’s social favourability,
which reflects its social status (Baker, 2015; Garrett, 2010). Language attitudes are influ-
enced by learning and settled through a social process, for example, stories of other
people in connection with some languages and cultures, exposure to various English
varieties, and pedagogical inputs that are tied to specific ideologies and preferences
(Fang, 2020; Jenkins, 2007; McKenzie, 2010).
Understanding language attitudes helps people discover the stakeholders’ attitudes
towards a language and the possible psychological responses that are associated with
language-related activities, helps describe learners’ expectations of language learning
and policymaking, and identify second language (L2) learners’ stereotypical traits in
learning English and perceiving native and non-native English speakers (Baker, 2015;
Fang, 2020; McKenzie, 2010). Furthermore, language attitude plays a vital role in
shaping language learning behaviours, including motivation, practicing efforts, and
success (Bartram, 2010). Hence, educators and policymakers should account for lan-
guage attitude as a cofactor to promote language learning and meet learners’ peda-
gogical needs.
Attitudes towards English Accents
Accent is a linguistic trait embedded in the verbal output that every language speaker
produces. It is often regarded as the most obvious linguistic feature when speaking a
foreign language and it ‘exerts the strongest influence on (language-based) attitudes’
(Jenkins, 2007: 78). Previous studies have indicated that accent, language attitude, and
language identity are interconnected (Garrett, 2010; Moyer, 2013).
Moreover, a particular accent also reflects the identities of speakers from different
geographic territories, ethnicities, or social classes (Jenkins, 2015). Moyer noted that
accent ‘refers not only to the articulation of individual sounds, or segments, but to
suprasegmental features as well’ (2013: 10). Accent, mostly observable in spoken lan-
guage, is a reflection of a speaker’s identity, culture, language understanding, and
language fluency (Edwards, 2009; Jenkins, 2007). When a person speaks, the audience
might instantly be able to identify the speaker’s origin according to specific accent
categories. Cavallaro and Chin (2009) stated:
Boonsuk and Fang 43
Like it or not, we all judged others by how they speak, and at the same time are judged by them.
The way we speak, the words we choose, and the way we sound all carry information that tells
our listeners a lot about us and our background (2009: 143).
Arguably, accent is considered to be a linguistic marker that demonstrates the speakers’
‘age generations, social identity, social class, education level, and ethnicity’ (Luk and
Lin, 2006: 6), and it may ‘have conveniently provided a form of social and cultural sym-
bol’ (Luk and Lin, 2006: 15) that separates people within a community. Studies have also
reported that some accents could have minimally negative impacts by simply reducing
intelligibility, whereas other accents might be more adversely problematic by influenc-
ing biased hiring practices and social bullying (Jenkins, 2007; Lippi-Green, 2012;
McKenzie, 2010).
In a narrower perspective regarding English-accent attitudes, previous studies have
demonstrated the significant preferences among students and teachers from the
expanding-circle countries to favour the Anglophone varieties of English more than
other varieties (Cameron and Galloway, 2019; McKenzie, 2010). For instance,
Tokumoto and Shibata (2011) examined the attitudes of learners in Japanese, South
Korean, and Malaysian universities towards their own and others’ English accents and
found that different participant groups perceived English accents differently. More
specifically, learners from Malaysia highly valued the importance of their English
accents, whereas learners from Japan and South Korea disliked their English accents
and wanted to be able to demonstrate native-like English pronunciation. The results
further demonstrated that among the three participant groups, the Japanese leaners
held the most negative attitudes towards Japanese English. Similarly, Fang (2020)
investigated Chinese university students’ attitudes towards their own and others’
English accents and found that although some students perceived their English accents
positively, others were generally dissatisfied with their English accents and preferred
the accents of native speakers.
Some studies evaluated NSE and NNSE student reactions and awareness of WE
(Boonsuk, 2019; Buripakdi, 2012; Jindapitak, 2019; Ra, 2019). The findings show that
the participants were extremely positive about the Anglophone varieties of English and
perceived them as beautiful, standard, compelling, concise, globally recognized, suit-
able, flawless, and professional; whereas the non-native varieties were perceived as
broken, stigmatized, ineffective, non-standard, distasteful, inaccurate, marginalized,
inappropriate, flawed, incorrect, and unprofessional. This indicates that the majority of
the participants regarded native Englishes as the only acceptable variety for ELT. Thus,
NSE-employed English varieties are perceived as ideal English learning models.
According to Walker, ‘most learners of English will assume that the only meaningful
goal is native-like pronunciation’ (2010: 61).
Based on previous studies, it can be concluded that English learners have entrenched
attitudes towards English accents, as most of them prefer native Englishes in which the
Anglophone varieties of English are viewed as the more authentic models of ELT (Fang,
2020; Jenkins, 2007; Kung and Wang, 2019; Tokumoto and Shibata, 2011). These biases
are placed upon NNSE with severe pragmatic negligence on the communicative advan-
tages of accents. This stereotypical linguistic judgment is driven by the ideological
44 RELC Journal 53(1)
assumption that inner-circle NSE are the only people that rightfully own English and this
group dictates the spread of native Englishes (Seidlhofer, 2011; Widdowson, 1994).
Although some studies demonstrated that some students positively evaluated their own
English accents (Fang, 2020; Jenkins, 2007; Jindapitak, 2019) and scholars have been
more aware of English linguistic diversity (Jenkins, 2007; Kuteeva, 2014; Wang, 2019),
Anglophone varieties of English are still the preferred English learning models.
These ideological roots are widely recognized as sound theoretical assumptions that
position native English varieties as the correct, benchmarking, and acceptable ELT
standards. However, if educators continue to overlook realistic English practicality and
cultivate the NSE mimicry, they automatically acknowledge NSE as the ideal linguis-
tic judges who have the sole right to determine how English should be appropriately
taught and learned. If such ideologies are allowed to persist, the newly introduced WE
and ELF pedagogies, which aim to address realistic communication, would most likely
be too far-flung to produce any proactive results (Buripakdi, 2012; Fang and Widodo,
2019; Jenkins, 2007; Jindapitak, 2019). We realize that previous literature on this topic
examined the attitudes of particular cultural groups (Jindapitak, 2019; Kung and Wang,
2019; Lim, 2016), including some studies conducted by this article’s researchers
(Boonsuk and Ambele, 2019; Fang, 2020). Furthermore, previous studies on accent
attitudes towards international students’ own English accents and those of others in the
Thai context are limited. Therefore, this study addresses the research gap by investi-
gating international students that are pursuing higher education in Thailand. Since the
participants are from a variety of lingua-cultural backgrounds, the attitudes towards
their own and others’ English accents, as well as the accent-related influencing factors
of ELT, are worth investigation. This study aims to address two research questions: 1)
What attitudes do international university students in Thailand have on their own and
native English accents? 2) Which accent(s) should be regarded as the models in pro-
nunciation teaching?
Methodology
Research Context and Participants
This study adopted a direct approach to exploring language attitudes, largely because it
‘is characterized by a high degree of obtrusiveness, and by the fact that it is the inform-
ants themselves who are asked to report their attitudes’ (Garrett et al., 2003: 24). To
investigate accent attitudes, for example, the participants were asked to complete ques-
tionnaires and engage in interviews through both statement measurement and discourse
to enable the researchers to interpret their attitudes. One classical example is Labov’s
(1966) work in New York City investigating the (non)rhotic /r/ sound the respondents
used and felt they should use.
Echoing the direct approach for investigating people’s attitudes, this study employed
semi-structured interviews to collect data from nine fourth-year undergraduates in five
Asian countries (two each from Cambodia, China, Indonesia, and Malaysia, and one from
Sri Lanka) who were majoring in Islamic Studies at a reputable university in Southern
Thailand. This university is unique because over 200 international students from multiple
Boonsuk and Fang 45
nations, including Malaysia, Indonesia, Brunei, Cambodia, China, Laos, Vietnam, and Sri
Lanka, are taking courses at different faculties and fields, including Information and
Communication Technology, Science, Physical Education, and Mathematics. The partici-
pants were purposively selected (Cohen et al., 2011) to match the aims of this study.
Specific criteria were utilized to choose the participants. Thus, each participant must be a
language user who either employs English as a second or foreign language with: a) previ-
ous ELT experiences with both native and non-native English teachers and b) exposure to
national and international activities, for example, domestic and non-domestic conferences
and festivals, foreign exchange programmes, and English camps that use English as a
medium of communication. These criteria were required, as this study needed candidates
with diverse English language experiences and lingua-cultural backgrounds. The justifi-
cation for choosing these participants was their possession of multiple lingua-cultural
roots (i.e. different first languages and exposure to various cultures at home and abroad).
Hence, it was likely that their attitudes towards their English accents and those of others
would vary and thus be worth investigating.
Data Collection
Data were collected during the first semester of the 2019–2020 academic year. Initially,
the researchers approached the candidates individually to ask if they were willing to
participate in the interviews and share the relevant information needed for the study.
Subsequently, the researchers submitted a request for ethics approval and the participants
signed consent forms. Once approval for the study was received, the researchers sched-
uled separate meetings for individual interviews based on the dates, times, and venues
that were convenient for the participants. Most of the interviews occurred in a seminar
room or in classrooms. The researchers informed the interviewees about the research
background, purpose, and procedures, and asked them for permission to audio-record the
interviews. These audio recordings were used to ensure that the interview data were
accurately extracted and used in the analyses. The participants were informed that their
participation in this study would not affect their academic outcomes. If the participants
felt uncomfortable at any time, they had the right to opt-out of the study. The interviews
were conducted in English; each session lasted 35–45 minutes.
Data Analysis
All the interview data were transcribed and entered into NVivo software to support the
researchers’ coding processes. Qualitative content analysis was used to identify the con-
textual meanings, address the emerging patterns, and establish the validated insights
(Dörnyei, 2007; Patton, 2002) because this approach has proven to be powerful in
extracting word- or concept-level patterns from texts. The study also employed a mixture
of top-down coding, which applies the coding to the preconceived codes based on the
research focus and issues, and bottom-up coding, which extracts the coding from the data
(Creswell and Plano-Clark, 2007). The researchers transcribed all the audio data into
NVivo software and cross-checked the data for accuracy. In this phase, the transcriptions
were sent to the respective participants for further validation. Mainly, the participants
46 RELC Journal 53(1)
examined the transcriptions to see whether the written logs matched the conversations
that occurred during the interviews. After the participants returned the files, the research-
ers read them repeatedly and thoroughly to extract the emerging themes that were signifi-
cant and relevant to the research aims. However, the primary emphasis of the study was
the content that the participants contributed; the researchers had no intention of record-
ing the way in which the data were delivered. The prosodic inputs in the interviews were
not the main focus. Then, the identified themes were edited, organized, and categorized
to form consistency, and coding was applied to produce thematic results with interrela-
tion data. While the valid themes were merged into subthemes, others not related to the
study were removed.
Findings and Discussion
This section presents the research findings for three main themes. The first theme
addresses the participants’ general attitudes and opinions, including the direct experi-
ences and difficulties they encountered from using such accents. The second theme dis-
cusses the participants’ attitudes and opinions of the native-English accents spoken by
members of the inner-circle countries, such as the United Kingdom (UK) and the United
States (US). The last theme covers the aspects of the relationships and impacts of English
accents on English language teaching. Generally, it describes how the participants’
English accents influenced their English language learning.
Student Attitudes towards Their English Accents
When the participants were asked to elaborate on their attitudes towards their English
accents, the majority (six out of nine participants) indicated that their attitudes were
significantly negative. Excerpts 1 to 3 demonstrate that the participants did not have a
positive attitude about their English accents because they perceived that their pronun-
ciation could be too difficult for a non-local to comprehend. This could lead to misun-
derstanding in communication that involves foreign interlocutors from different
linguistic and cultural roots. Two of the participants openly noted that, if possible, they
would prefer leaving their English accents behind and adopting other accents, espe-
cially a native English accent.
Excerpt 1 (Chanthou2, Cambodian)
I don’t like my English accent. Often, I spoke English with my foreign friends, but they did not
understand what I said at all. [. . .] When I was in high school, I felt embarrassed as my
classmates would often laugh when I was asked to voice an opinion in English. [. . .] I
repeatedly had bad learning experiences, so I didn’t have the confidence to speak English with
the accent that I have.
Excerpt 2 (Wang Wei, Chinese)
I don’t really like my accent because it does not sound natural, and I’m afraid that others might
not understand what I say. Also, I still think that my English accent is not standard or
Boonsuk and Fang 47
internationally acceptable. I sometimes hate it, and I want to completely hide it by trying to
sound better.
Excerpt 3 (Atith, Cambodian)
I don’t have the guts to speak English in public because my accent sounds strange. It is nothing
like the accents of those from England or America. I feel ashamed, so it has been my learning
desire to imitate the native accents to increase my speaking confidence.
These statements are consistent with Walker (2010), who noted that it is not uncommon
for students from educational institutions across the globe who study English to aspire to
adopt a native accent. They believe that their English accents are marginalized while
native accents are regarded as the only standard, highly noble, and socially accepted in
their communities. It is possible that the students’ attitudes towards their English accents
were shaped by the ideology known as standard English. The language hierarchy
(Jenkins, 2007; Kuteeva, 2014), which upholds NSE as the ideal ELT and which models
and promotes the belief that English only belongs to native speakers, is widely general-
ized and deeply rooted in many belief systems. Thus, it can be implied that ‘language
beliefs are social and political products [. . .] connected to the broad social-political con-
text’ (Pan and Block, 2011: 401).
As previously discussed, although most of the participants were dissatisfied with their
English accents, others (three out of nine participants) indicated satisfaction. As illus-
trated in Excerpts 4–5, the participants perceived their English accents as beautiful,
charming, and a reflection of their identities and uniqueness that set them apart from
speakers from other ethnicities. They felt pride, not shame, every time they spoke with
their accents. This group of participants became even more aware that they did not have
to force a native imitation or change their accents to emulate the ones spoken by every-
one else because speakers in many countries also employ different English accents.
Excerpt 4 (Mohamed, Malaysian)
From the past domestic and overseas experiences, I’ve learned that each country has a different
English accent. Therefore, I’m so proud of my English accent because it makes me unique.
[. . .] Many people in England and America do not speak the same accent.
Excerpt 5 (Sofia, Malaysian)
It’s not a shame to speak English with our own accent. It sounds charming and symbolizes our
identities. Speaking different English accents is nothing to be ashamed of because it is what
most English speakers do. The most crucial point is to be able to communicate and get others
to understand.
Excerpts 4–5 indicate that the participants recognized the differences in accents among
the English varieties used by speakers from different linguistic and cultural backgrounds
(Galloway and Rose, 2018; Kirkpatrick, 2012; Wang, 2019). Thus, it is no longer neces-
sary to force every English communicator to use a native English accent. Because lan-
guage and identity are interrelated (Edwards, 2009; Llamas and Watt, 2010), a language
48 RELC Journal 53(1)
can be used as an identity marker for individuals and groups as ‘everyone is used to
accent, dialect and language variations that reveal speakers’ memberships in particular
speech communities, social classes, ethnic and national groups’ (Edwards, 2009: 21).
Therefore, language does ‘not only reflect who we are but, in some sense, it is who we
are, and its use defines us both directly and indirectly’ (Llamas and Watt, 2010: 1).
Student Attitudes towards Native English Accents
It is not surprising that the findings indicate that the participants valued and favoured
NSE accents because inner-circle English accents are perceived as globally accepted (see
Excerpt 6), standard, and more reliable than outer- and expanding-circle accents (see
Excerpt 7). Furthermore, the participants perceived that NSE accents sound premium,
cool, natural, and intellectual.
Excerpt 6 (Basith, Sri Langkan)
From previous experiences, I think the British and American accents are still popular and
accepted by people around the world. [. . .] You will sound elegant and natural if you can use
English with a native accent like a native speaker.
Excerpt 7 (Wang Wei, Chinese)
I think the English accents spoken in the UK and the USA seem to be standard and highly
reliable. So, the opposite is that when someone speaks English with a non-native accent, it
sounds like that person has not paid enough attention when they learned English.
It is also important to mention that some participants had a different attitude about
accents. They did not deny that NSE accents are classy, attractive, and internationally
accepted. However, this does not mean that the English accents from the non-inner-
circle nations are annoying or unacceptable because English is seen as a global lan-
guage with multiple varieties (Fang and Ren, 2018; Galloway and Rose, 2018). They
believe that different linguistic roots embedded within each English accent are valua-
ble for reflecting speakers’ identities. Thus, they chose not to judge which accents are
superior or inferior.
Excerpt 8 (Mohamed, Malaysian)
As a global language, I began to realize that the value of speaking a language is not measured
by whether one can speak like a native speaker, but how much one can maintain a personal
identity while conveying a message. [. . .] You have to go to Singapore and listen to some
Singlish. You can ask some Malaysians to speak their Malay English as well. Their English
accents are like codes of their communities. They are beautiful in their ways.
Excerpt 9 (Purti, Indonesian)
When I speak English, I would not care if I could speak like a native speaker. However, I would
evaluate if my interlocutor could understand what I am saying. [. . .] I believe that when
Boonsuk and Fang 49
communicating, it’s not about what accent is being spoken. It’s about what both parties try to
do to understand each other.
Based on Excerpts 8–9, the participants valued intelligibility in communication; they did
not give priority to native-like outputs. As MacKenzie argued, ‘speakers of English as an
international language – provided that they ensure intelligibility, [. . .] should otherwise
express their (national and linguistic) identity by speaking with their natural L1 accent,
rather than seeking to imitate a NSE accent’ (2014: 115). The findings also reveal that a
person’s ability to enhance intelligibility in communication does not depend on how
much his/her English accent resembles that of a native speaker, but how experienced and
familiar he/she is with the English accent in use. Therefore, familiarity with and expo-
sure to specific groups of English speakers with that English accent are vital for deter-
mining how much a person could comprehend and produce intelligible linguistic outputs
in these communicative contexts.
Student Attitudes towards English Accents in ELT
The findings associated with this final theme are consistent with the previous findings.
The participants deemed British and American English accents as the primary English
varieties for ELT, especially in the subjects that involve verbal communication and pro-
nunciation. They felt that being exposed to authentic English varieties would simplify
their learning and boost their post-graduation confidence in using English.
Excerpt 10 (Chanthou, Cambodian)
I want to learn to pronounce like either a British or an American. I believe this ability would
make me feel more confident when communicating in English with others. People here think
that speaking like a native means you are very well educated and believe in what you say.
Excerpt 11 (Intan, Indonesian)
I think learning English with a speaker with a native accent is inevitably better when compared
to learning with an incapable one. [. . .] If I get to choose, I choose a native speaker any day,
especially when it comes to learning pronunciation. I think the non-native cannot beat them on
this point.
Excerpt 12 (Wang Wei, Chinese)
I think, in academic contexts, such as in learning environments, standard pedagogies would be
better than non-standard. [. . .] I believe in language learning; native speakers are far better and
more equipped to teach.
Although the findings presented above indicate that British and American English varie-
ties still play vital roles in social beliefs and attitudes in the realm of ELT, some of the
participants voiced different opinions. The contrast was that the ELT pedagogies that
solely rely on an English accent or variety that belongs to an ethnic group could not
accommodate the diverse requirements of the current language learners who are
50 RELC Journal 53(1)
primarily NNSE. Therefore, incorporating different English accents or varieties in the
current ELT could provide a more interesting and practical learning experience because
it addresses the realistic use of English in real contexts where many of the interlocutors
might be from outer- or expanding-circles countries, not inner-circle countries.
Excerpt 13 (Mohamed, Malaysian)
I’ve been to many countries. I understand that many countries have different versions of
English. Since English has now become an international language, I don’t believe that English
language learning should only be forced to use either British or American native accents. I think
the more diverse the class is, the better because this means that the class is introducing the
realistic use of English.
Excerpt 14 (Sofia, Malaysian)
I like it when the teacher plays a variety of online videos. I feel like this is how English is used
in real life. It’s diverse and beautiful. [. . .] I realized that English learners should try to be
practical and useful in communication as you can see that English has many varieties.
Excerpt 15 (Purti, Indonesian)
Since I’ve traveled to many countries, I discovered that people have different accents when
they speak English. Even if they are natives who live in the same country, they still speak
English with different accents. [. . .] I would say, let’s stop not accepting differences and try to
help each other when there is a need to speak English.
As seen in Excerpts 13–15, some participants were interested in studying English in a
way that is consistent with sociolinguistic reality rather than being dependent on a par-
ticular variety, which seems impractical and inconsistent with current English dynamics.
One of the participants (see Excerpt 15) argued that it is irrational to learn or use English
as native English speakers do because even they speak English with different accents.
Thus, ELT pedagogies should no longer focus on whether the students are able to adopt
a native English accent. They should emphasize how intelligible a communicator could
be when conversing with others.
The above notions correspond to Kachru (1992), who stated that globalization and
worldwide cultural integration transform and diversify the way English is used.
Simultaneously, these speakers also regularly encounter interlocutors from different cir-
cles speaking with multiple English varieties. Hence, they have to learn to accommodate
communication and negotiate for meanings more than never before. Nonetheless, as
most English learners still desire to achieve the native-English competence, that aim
becomes less rational because it does not contribute to better cross-cultural and commu-
nicative understanding or enable learners to be successful in a multicultural world
(Jenkins, 2015; McKay, 2018; Kirkpatrick, 2012). Therefore, ELT educators should
reevaluate, reconsider, and reconceptualize their pedagogical paradigms so that the con-
cepts of ‘nativeness, ownership, and idealized pedagogical standards. . .should be
removed from ELT’ (Blair, 2015: 99) and current pedagogies should be modeled by
Boonsuk and Fang 51
bilingual or multilingual English speakers (Jenkins, 2015; Nguyen, 2017). Specifically,
NSE should no longer be the learning focus or utilized in ELT materials and activities.
Limitations and Implications
Before drawing any conclusions, it should be noted that this research has some limitations.
First, this study is based only on qualitative interviews. Further research could consider
including other approaches, such as classroom observations, to better understand people’s
attitudes about various English accents. Second, additional participants can be recruited for
more in-depth data analysis. While the research findings cannot be generalized, we believe
that they will resonate with similar contexts in terms of teaching pronunciation.
The study’s findings shed light on important issues for language practitioners as well
as those learning how to speak or teach English. First, English as a global language tends
to problematize the traditional teaching model that prioritizes Anglophone varieties and
NSE accents. English, as used in a multilingual world, has redefined the sociocultural and
sociopolitical discourses in ELT. In the 21st century, ELT should encourage students to be
exposed to more English accents and spur ideological debates related to the English lan-
guage and culture for language educators and students so they can ‘explore the complex-
ity of languages, flows, appropriations and cultural mixes at play’ (Pennycook, 2017: xiv).
Second, it is important to realize that pronunciation teaching should not be aban-
doned in ELT. Instead, pronunciation teaching should emphasize features that may
impede intelligibility, but not simply focus on a de-contextualized pattern-drilling
teaching method (Deterding, 2013; Walker, 2010). Based on Kumaravadivelu’s (2006)
post-method language teaching on concepts of particularity, practicality, and possibility,
Fang (2020) has proposed using the Teaching of Pronunciation for Intercultural
Communication (ToPIC) approach for pronunciation teaching from the paradigm of
English as a global language. ToPIC focuses on ‘revisiting teaching contexts, models
and norms’, ‘raising teachers’ and students’ language awareness’, and ‘reinforcing
accent exposure and fostering communication strategy’ (2020: 99). Moreover, it is
important to develop critical linguistic awareness in ELT to challenge the taken-for-
granted ideology (Kubota, 2016; Pennycook, 2017).
Third, the ultimate goal of pronunciation teaching should be re-evaluated. The so-called
standard English is no longer the ultimate goal of ELT. More importantly, the concepts of com-
municacy (Sussex and Kirkpatrick, 2012), willingness to communicate (Peng, 2014), and
accommodation strategies and communication skills (Seidlhofer, 2011) should be emphasized
during pronunciation training to develop language learners’ global awareness. When design-
ing policies and curriculums, educators should no longer focus on standard English because
that approach is already down-trending. Instead, educators should consider strategies that pre-
pare learners for intercultural communication with speakers from various lingua-cultures,
which, in most cases, involve non-native interlocutors with strong accents. For instance,
because ELT learners in Thailand might most often converse with ASEAN or Asian English
speakers, aligning ELT policies and curriculums with British English or American English
might not be an effective response to the contexts they encounter.
Furthermore, this study may provide insights on ELT educational management. Given
that Anglophone English is still dominant as mainstream ELT material, language educators
52 RELC Journal 53(1)
should design and implement productive learning activities and select meaningful authen-
tic learning materials to encourage learners to be exposed to accent diversity. This will help
learners explore real-world English from a practical perspective. At the policy and practice
level, policymakers and curriculum designers should demystify native standard English as
the norm of teaching to reduce accent bias in ELT.
Conclusion
This study offers another significant contribution as the data were collected from learn-
ers of diverse ethnic origins. Educators can use their attitudinal explanations towards
English accents to mitigate negative ideological conflicts in ELT and sustain desirable
long-term learning outcomes. Learners should be guided to recognize the pluricentric
nature of English in order to understand the diversity and fluidity of this global language.
By doing this, communicative flexibility and feasibility can be enhanced to ensure stu-
dents’ successful future use of English.
In conclusion, this study investigated international students’ attitudes about their own
and native speakers’ English accents as well as their attitudes regarding English accents
in ELT. The findings reveal that, although most of the participants still aim to sound like
native English speakers and view NSE as the golden standard for ELT, some also have
positive attitudes towards their own English accents, provided that the accent does not
impede intelligibility. This article argues for the importance of understanding English
accents from the broader perspective of the WE and ELF paradigms. Consequently, ELT
should be contextualized to revisit aims, models, and norms to challenge the native ide-
ology. It is hoped that such linguistic awareness can be developed and a ToPIC approach
can be applied in ELT in more contexts to reflect the global status of English. Further
study could focus on analysing language policy and curriculum documents to further
understand the ideological values of Anglophone varieties of English in commercial ELT
textbooks. Classroom-based research can also be conducted to explore the feasibility and
effectiveness of implementing these proposals, as well as stakeholders’ attitudes towards
such proposals in wider contexts (Fang and Widodo, 2019).
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this
article.
ORCID iD
Fan Fang https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4210-9042
Notes
1. We fully realize that the notion of NSE and NNSE has been challenged from a postmodern
and post-structuralist perspective. Here, these terms are used as a starting point because these
concepts are still widely familiar to international readers (Kuteeva, 2014; Moussu and Llurda,
2008; Yazan and Rudolph, 2018).
2. For ethical reasons, all the names presented here are pseudonyms.
Boonsuk and Fang 53
References
Baker W (2015) Culture and Identity Through English as A Lingua Franca: Rethinking Concepts
and Goals in Intercultural Communication. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Bartram B (2010) Attitude to Modern Foreign Language Learning: Insights from Comparative
Education. London: Continuum.
Blair A (2015) Evolving a post-native, multilingual model for ELF-aware teacher education.
In: Yasemin B, Sumru A (eds) Current Perspectives on Pedagogy for English as a Lingua
Franca. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton, 89–102.
Boonsuk Y, Ambele E (2019) Who ‘owns English’ in our changing world? Exploring the percep-
tion of Thai university students in Thailand. Asian Englishes. doi:10.1080/13488678.2019.
1669302
Buripakdi A (2012) The marginalized positions of Thai professional writers on the global hegem-
ony of English. Journal of Asian Pacific Communication 22(1): 41–59.
Cameron A, Galloway N (2019) Local thoughts on global ideas: pre- and in-service TESOL prac-
titioners’ attitudes to the pedagogical implications of the globalization of English. RELC
Journal 50(1): 149–63.
Cavallaro F, Bee C (2009) Between status and solidarity in Singapore. World Englishes 28(2):
143–59.
Cohen L, Manion L, and Morrison K (2011) Research Methods in Education (7th edn). London,
New York: Routledge.
Creswell J, Plano-Clark V (2007) Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Crystal D (2012) English as a Global Language (2nd edn.). Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Deterding D (2013) Misunderstandings in English as a Lingua Franca: An Analysis of ELF
Interactions in South-East Asia. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Dörnyei Z (2007) Research Methods in Applied Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Edwards J (2009) Language and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fabrigar LR, MacDonald TK, and Wegener DT (2005) The structure of attitudes. In: Albarracin
D, Johnson BT, and Zanna MP (eds) The Handbook of Attitudes. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates, Inc: 79–124.
Fang F (2020) Re-Positioning Accent Attitude in the Global Englishes Paradigm: A Critical
Phenomenological Case Study in the Chinese Context. Abingdon: Routledge.
Fang F, Ren W (2018) Developing students’ awareness of Global Englishes. ELT Journal 72(4):
384–94.
Fang F, Widodo H (2019) Critical perspectives on Global Englishes in English language educa-
tion. In: Fang F, Widodo H (eds) Critical Perspectives on Global Englishes in Asia: Language
Policy, Curriculum, Pedagogy and Assessment. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Galloway N, Rose H (2018) Incorporating global Englishes into the ELT classroom. ELT Journal
72(1): 3–14.
Galloway N (2017) Global Englishes and Change in English Language Teaching. Abingdon:
Routledge.
Garrett P (2010) Attitudes to Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Garrett P, Coupland N, and Williams A (2003) Investigating Language Attitudes: Social Meanings
of Dialect, Ethnicity and Performance. Cardiff: University of Wales Press.
Jenkins J (2007) English as a Lingua Franca: Attitude and Identity. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Jenkins J (2015) Global Englishes (3rd edn). Abingdon, New York: Routledge.
54 RELC Journal 53(1)
Jindapitak N (2019) English as an ASEAN lingua franca and the role of nativeness in English
education in Thailand: moving toward the ASEAN economic community (AEC). English
Today 35(2): 36–41.
Kachru BB (ed) (1992) The Other Tongue (2nd ed). Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
Kirkpatrick A (2010) English as a Lingua Franca in ASEAN. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University
Press.
Kirkpatrick A (2012) English as an International Language in Asia: Implications for Language
Education. New York: Springer.
Kubota R (2016) The multi/plural turn, postcolonial theory, and neoliberal multiculturalism: com-
plicities and implications for applied linguistics. Applied Linguistics 37(4): 474–94.
Kumaravadivelu B (2006) Understanding Language Teaching: From Method to Postmethod.
Mahwah, N J: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Kung F, Wang X (2019) Exploring EFL learners’ accent preferences for effective ELF communi-
cation. RELC Journal 50(3): 394–407.
Kuteeva M (2014) The parallel language use of Swedish and English: the question of ‘nativeness’
in university policies and practices. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development
35(4): 332–44.
Labov W (1966) The Social Significance of Speech in New York City. Washington, DC: Centre for
Applied Linguistics.
Lim S (2016) Learning to teach intelligible pronunciation for ASEAN English as a lingua franca:
a sociocultural investigation of Cambodian pre-service teacher cognition and practice. RELC
Journal 47(3): 313–29.
Lippi-Green R (2012) English with An Accent: Language, Ideology, and Discrimination in the
United States (2nd Edn). Abingdon: Routledge.
Llamas C, Watt D (2010) Introduction. In: Llamas C, Watt D (eds) Language and Identities.
Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1–5.
Luk JCM, Lin AMY (2006) Uncovering the sociopolitical situatedness of accents in the world
Englishes paradigm. In: Hughes R (ed.) Spoken English, TESOL and Applied Linguistics.
London: Palgrave Macmillan, 3–22.
MacKenzie I (2014) English as a Lingua Franca: Theorizing and Teaching English. Abingdon:
Routledge.
McKay SL (2018) English as an international language: what it is and what it means for pedagogy.
RELC Journal 49(1): 9–23.
McKenzie RM (2010) The Social Psychology of English as a Global Language: Attitudes,
Awareness and Identity in the Japanese Context. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
Moussu L, Llurda E (2008) Non-native English-speaking English language teachers: history and
research. Language Teaching 41(3): 315–48.
Moyer A (2007) Do language attitudes determine accent? a study of bilinguals in the USA. Journal
of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 28(6): 502–18.
Moyer A (2013) Foreign Accent: The Phenomenon of Non-native Speech. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Nguyen MXNC (2017) TESOL teachers’ engagement with the native speaker model: how does
teacher education impact on their beliefs? RELC Journal 48(1): 83–98.
Pan L, Block D (2011) English as a ‘global language’ in China: an investigation into learners’ and
teachers’ language beliefs. System 39: 391– 402.
Patton MQ (2002) Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications, Inc.
Peng JE (2014) Willingness to Communicate Inside the EFL Classroom: An Ecological Perspective.
Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Boonsuk and Fang 55
Pennycook A (2017) The Cultural Politics of English as an International Language. Abingdon:
Routledge.
Ra JJ (2019) Exploring the spread of English language learning in South Korea and reflections of
the diversifying sociolinguistic context for future English language teaching practices. Asian
Englishes 21(3): 305–19.
Seidlhofer B (2011) Understanding English as a Lingua Franca. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sussex R, Kirkpatrick A (2012) A postscript and a prolegomenon. In: Kirkpatrick A, Sussex R
(eds) English as an International Language in Asia: Implications for Language Education.
Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer, 223–31.
Tokumoto M, Shibata M (2011) Asian varieties of English: attitudes towards pronunciation. World
Englishes 30(3): 392–408.
Walker R (2010) Teaching the Pronunciation of English as a Lingua Franca. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Wang C (2019) Attitudes towards English diversity of students in the international college and the
non-IC programmes at a university in Taiwan. RELC Journal 50(2): 300–13.
Widdowson HG (1994) The ownership of English. TESOL Quarterly 28(2): 377–89.
Xu Z (2018) Exploring English as an international language – curriculum, materials and pedagogi-
cal Strategies. RELC Journal 49(1): 102–18.
Yazan B, Rudolph N (eds) (2018) Criticality, Teacher Identity, and (In)equity in English Language
Teaching: Issues and Implications. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
