As a response to the diversification of Englishes into a great many native and non-native varieties, scholars such as Kirkpatrick (2007: 195) have proposed that "context and learner needs" should decide whether native or non-native models are adopted in ELT. However, an analysis of some of the arguments used in Kirkpatrick (2007) and Jenkins (2000, 2007) suggests that they have overemphasised the importance of non-native models, without giving due consideration to those Expanding Circle contexts where native models would be equally, or perhaps even more, appropriate. It will be suggested that a thorough examination of learners' needs and aspirations in different local contexts reveals that these too are actually subject to diversification. In particular, it is important for those learners who prefer to continue to refer to native-speaker models (without necessarily attempting to attain native-speaker targets) to be aware of their interlocutors' attitudes to stigmatised accent features -especially in those cases where parallels exist between native and non-native realisations (e.g. the absence of dental fricatives). Research by Van den Doel (2006) indicates that attitudes to these stigmatised accent features are difficult to predict, and that it would therefore be undesirable to recommend their general use in any pronunciation models.
This paper investigates the evaluation of the English sounds /θ/ and /ð/ as produced by European non-native speakers. Using the data from a larger web survey, we compared the error judgements by different native and non-native users of English. This was done to establish whether there is any normative convergence among European non-native speakers, or if this was counteracted by other patterns, such as the presence or absence of these sounds in their L1s. Our analysis shows that while European non-native judges do not differ consistently from native-speakers in their judgements, there are also subtle differences between different groups of non-native speakers, implying that we should be careful not to generalise across groups about non-native attitudes to these sounds.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.