A Multi‐perspective Investigation of Attitudes Towards English Accents in Hong Kong: Implications for Pronunciation Teaching

Abstract

The study reported in this article examined Hong Kong students' attitudes towards English accents from three interrelated perspectives: (1) their awareness of accents, (2) their perception of accents in relation to the dimensions of status and solidarity, and (3) their choice of accents in various local language‐using contexts. By means of the verbal‐guise technique, it explored the issue from multiple perspectives by comparing the attitudes among English learners at differing stages of study (i.e., junior secondary, senior secondary, and university students). These participants had different perceptions of English based on their prior knowledge, learning experience, and exposure to English. The findings indicate that the university students perceived the local accent more negatively than their secondary counterparts in the dimensions of both status and solidarity, despite their greater awareness of accents. Nevertheless, all the participants showed fewer reservations about the use of second language English accents in more casual and interactive English‐speaking situations. The article concludes by discussing the potential for the design of language awareness tasks in TESOL materials and assessments for secondary school as a crucial step to initiate attitudinal changes.

Language educators’ regard for variation in late modernity: Perceptions of linguistic variation in minority contexts

“…Similar to research with teachers elsewhere (e.g. Chan , , ; Jenkins ), participants in this study feel that the features of the post‐traditional variety in the SEE hold identificational relevance. They allow new speakers to participate in the revitalisation enterprise without fundamentally altering their own place identity:…”

“…Similar to research with teachers elsewhere (e.g. Chan 2015Chan , 2016Chan , 2017Jenkins 2005), participants in this study feel that the features of the post-traditional variety in the SEE hold identificational relevance. They allow new speakers to participate in the revitalisation enterprise without fundamentally altering their own place identity: Participants here speak to an alternative legitimacy, identity, and perhaps even an alternative authenticity, for the post-traditional speech variety presented in the SEE.…”

“…In another study of 600 participants across 45 countries (Timmis ), English teachers are revealed as more accepting of ‘non‐native’ pronunciation than their student counterparts. Chan (, , ) reports similar findings for Hong Kong English, where teachers are more positive about local English than university students and professionals. Furthermore, Murray () finds ‘native’ speaker teachers of English are more receptive to ‘non‐standard’ English grammar and Euro‐English features than ‘non‐native’ teachers.…”

Exploring language attitudes in ELF research: Contrasting approaches in conversation

“…The later version, the VGT, employs actual speakers of each language or language variety of a national or regional speech community (e.g., Gallois and Callan 1981;Chan 2016). Even if speech factors other than languages or language varieties, such as voice quality, are controlled carefully, again, the VGT does not match the nature of ELF communication as "dynamic, pluralistic manifestations of linguistic resources in an international setting" (Ishikawa 2015: 39), where there is no such thing as an ELF variety (e.g., Baker and Jenkins 2015).…”

EFL learners’ critical multimodal reflections on the politics of English

“…First, a large body of work has examined the dominance of English and its impact, resulting in concerns about how language learners relate to the global and international nature of English (e.g., Erling, ; Matsuda, ), understand world Englishes (e.g., Ates, Eslami, & Wright, ; Yoshikawa, ), and respond to English as a lingua franca (e.g., Jenkins, ; Mauranen, ). Classroom efforts aimed at promoting English as a second/foreign language (ESL/EFL) learners’ critical awareness of English hegemony have often pertained to native‐speakerism, standards, varieties, and accents (e.g., Chan, ; Chang, ). However, these studies that address how language learners contest the dominance of English do not at the same time examine its impact on race, class, gender, and other identity categories, even though linguistic imperialism is inevitably bound up in relations of race, class, and gender.…”