This is a summary of the state-of-the-art research in international intelligibility with emphasis on English. It also suggests some directions for future research. It is argued that in future research it would be desirable to make distinctions between three key concepts: intelligibility, comprehensibility and interpretability. The selected bibliography of 163 items has been assembled to give the reader an indication of how widespread this literature is, and at the same time to indicate its limitations. The sources searched include publications across various disciplines. This indicates that intelligibility can be approached from a variety of points of view and interests. Since intelligibility depends upon so many factors of different types involved in a given speech event, it is difficult to find ways o,f integrating approaches and parameters. That is a challenge for future research.In order to provide a clear perspective on the international intelligibility of English, we have selected 163 items (articles, books etc.) which represent the research done on intelligibility and comprehension during the period 1950-1985. This is not an exhaustive list by any means, but we believe it is representative, and that a study of these resources can provide sufficient information on the current state of the art, and can offer directions for future research. The bibliographies of the works listed will lead interested readers to other material.The research findings from these sources sometimes appear to be in conflict with one another; however, concerning the international intelligibility of English, it is generally agreed that:( I ) For at least the last 200 years there have been English-speaking people in parts of the world who have not been intelligible to other English-speaking people in other parts of the world. This is accepted as a natural phenomenon which will continue. It is agreed that it is unnecessary for every speaker of English to be intelligible to every other speaker of English. Our speech/writing in English needs to be intelligible only to those with whom we are likely to communicate in English.(2) Native speakers are no longer the sole judges of what is intelligible in English. More and more non-native English speakers are interacting in English with other non-native speakers. In such cases, they must decide what is and is not intelligible. International intelligibility studies are now concerned with inreractions between nonnative English speakers, between native English speakers of different national varieties, and between native and non-native English speakers.(3) Native speakers are not always more intelligible than non-native speakers. Given the same hearer, the speaker (native or non-native) who speaks clearly, is able to paraphrase, and talks at the appropriate level of the hearer in terms of proficiency, topic and speed will be most intelligible.(4) Intelligibility is not speaker-or listener-centered but is interactional between speaker and listener. ( 5 ) The greater the active involvement (not just ex...

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

The paper examines the notion of 'communicative competence' specifically with reference to transplanted varieties of English (e.g. Indian English) used in various nowwestern sociocultural contexts in the world. It is claimed that the notion of communicative competence that relies on the traditional notion of 'competence' of a native speaker is misleading for understanding and interpreting English texts written in these contexts by, for example, Indians and Africans. The examples presented here show that the judgements of native speakers with regard to deviations (or innovations) in such varieties of English are as much based on attitudinal factors, as on genuine expectations in the context of verbal interaction. The concepts intelligibility and interpretubility are viewed from the perspective of the conventions (literary, cultural and so on) developed in the institutionalized non-native varieties of English. The examples are taken from written. texts, and several theoretical and methodological questions are raised.WHEN approaching a language transplanted to a new cultural and linguistic context-as, for example, English in India-one is brought to various sorts of realizations about the notion of Language and the Varieties that a language may develop. Communicative competence, the ability to put a language to use in appropriate ways in culturally defined contexts, may become a problematical notion when applied in the situation of such a transplanted language, because the cultural contexts that defined 'appropriateness' in the parent situation are not necessarily the same in the new situation.One must note that very different sorts of problems arise depending on what culture the observer is from. For one from the 'donor' language community, questions are mostly variations on 'What has happened to our language?' For one from the adopting culture, the questions are more varied, including 'Why is this language here? Why do I/we need it? What will it do to my/our sense of ourselves as Indians/Africans/Nigerians?'The notion of Varieties of a language and the corollary notion of Non-native varieties are now commonplace. However, it cannot be denied that a misguided attitude disallowing the legitimacy of the notion of a 'non-native' variety of English does exist. Indian graduate students in India were asked in a survey to label their English as Indian, British, American, or other: only about half, 56%, identified themselves as Indian English users (Kachru, 1976). When asked to identify their preference of a model of English to be adhered to in formal instruction, about 67% of both faculty and graduate students in this survey responded 'British English'; only 2390 of the graduate students and 27% of the faculty admitted to a preference for Indian English (Kachru, 1982a: 44). Bamgbose (1982: 99-100) wrote, 'One noticeable effect of the refusal to accept the existence of a Nigerian English is the perpetuation of the myth that the English taught in Nigerian schools is just the same as, say, British English; a corollary myth ...