Is the ‘native-speaker’ pursuit desirable?

The pressures to attain a native level of English in both pronunciation and grammar are not solely inherent in L2- speakers, but are also imposed by the attitudes and opinions of native speakers themselves. In this regard, Wicaksono (2013) sheds light on the reality among many 'native speakers' – speakers from the UK in their example – who consider English to be under their ownership; consequently shifting the responsibility of accurate, ‘correct’, and intelligible speech to the L2 learner: if I cannot understand you, and your English differs from mine, then the fault is solely yours. This ideology of a standard and uniform language ‘native-speakers’ impose upon L2 learners is also evident among important individuals in popular discourse, whose voices will inevitably be heard by the masses: Dunham (2015) highlights high-ranking US politician Sarah Palin’s language ideology concerning how newly arrived immigrants in the US should speak “American”. Similarly, Walker (2010) describes how the Singaporean government attempted to force grammatically correct English onto the population in response to the suggested unintelligibility of Singlish. Obviously, from the examples provided, it is already clear to see an element of contradiction: if we are prescribing a standard form of English which L2 users should aspire to obtain, which variety should this take? More-so, this standard language ideology appears to posit a confusing dilemma for the L2 learner: will the variety of English they use or have studied (e.g. their own outer/expanding circle English or British/American English) be considered ‘incorrect’ or ‘invalid’ in certain settings?

Such beliefs are analysed by Hall, Smith & Wicaksono (2017, pp. 8-9), who admit these opinions and ideologies such as the above are tempting to subscribe to, but are just one of the many truthless myths which serve as dead ends for linguists and language users: “some groups of people don’t use their language properly”. Expanding on this classification, it is suggested (and evidenced above) that certain figures in popular discourse are particularly guilty of spreading these dead-end myths (Hall, Smith & Wicaksono 2017). Likewise, MacLure (2003) examines further prescription of ‘standard’ English, in which it is evident that even English language textbooks are guilty of adopting and spreading ‘universally correct’ and ‘proper’ English. Consequently, as Millroy, J & Millroy, L. (1985) state, the prescription of a ‘standard’ form of English is leading to other varieties becoming devalued – much like the consequences of Sarah Palin’s claims – in favour of a more ‘prestigious’ and ‘correct’ form, i.e. there is but only one English which should be spoken/written and taught to the masses. Finally, MacLure (2003) illustrates that certain prescribers of a ‘standard’ and ‘pure’ English judge individuals based on their deviation from the norm, and may be subsequently perceived to be unfit for work and should, in some extreme cases, be excluded from society altogether.

Ultimately, the above discussions are worthy of consideration, as they were frequently recurring themes among many of the students I taught in Japan – with, in some cases, extreme repercussions. In an attempt to be perceived as competent English users in the eyes of ‘native-speakers’, and successfully carry out their aspirations of integrating in an L1 English environment (overseas work or study abroad etc.), students were largely fixated on attaining a ‘native-speaker’ level. With negative thoughts stemming from what others may think about their English performance – not too dissimilar to the public discourse comments discussed above – students would subscribe heavily to what they thought was the most ‘desirable’ and ‘pure’ form of English, and sought to erase any evidence of their Japanese origin. As a result, as students attempted to close in on this perceived form of ‘pure’ English (American English, in this example), and the pronunciation and grammar which accompanied it, they gradually became anxious when communicating and started to lose motivation as they realised it was unreachable. To make matters worse, the textbooks, audio exercises and encouraged teaching practices that supplemented their learning, were guilty of further prescribing and assuring learners that this was the ‘one true form’ of English to be abiding by.

In general, language anxiety is posited as a relatively common occurrence among second language learners, with ‘freeze ups’, apprehensiveness and second-guessing present in the majority (MacIntyre & Gardner 1994). More-so, learners who are concerned with their pronunciation – amongst other personal traits – have evidenced considerable intelligibility gains compared to those who are not (Elliott 1995). On the other hand, it has also been found that language learners who experience high levels of anxiety evidence poorer language achievement compared to those with low levels of anxiety (Gardner & MacIntyre 1993). In addition, language anxiety and low self-efficacy have been found to stem from learners’ perceptions about what others may think of their ability (Onwuegbuzie, Bailey and Daley 1999). Overall, Horwitz (1998) defines these types of students – including the ones in focus – as having a perfectionist attitude, which can stem from certain language beliefs such as attaining a ‘native-speaker’ level or being error free (‘native’ like) after studying; and ultimately leads to anxiety in students who hold these. As a result, we can clearly see that although moderate language anxiety may be common among language learners; and concerns over one’s ability can be beneficial, the fixation on a ‘correct’ model of pronunciation and grammar, along with desperately trying to be perceived as competent users, can also lead to serious achievement, confidence, and motivation issues.

Overall, it appears that ‘native-speakers’ and prescribers of ‘standard’ English need to realise that there is no concrete ‘native-speaker’ model to prescribe, as every inner circle English speaking country contains considerable differences in terms of dialect and accent (Cook 2016). More-so, if ‘native-speakers’ themselves began to consider that English communication is primarily built up of L2 speakers and beyond – in the form of a variety of Global Englishes; each containing various grammatical and phonetical differences – who, contrary to ideologies and opinions concerning one ‘standard’ or ‘pure’ form, do in-fact communicate successfully (Cook 2016), learners may not feel so obliged to conform to their expectations. This concept of Global Englishes and the differences they possess is provided by Kachru (1985), cited by Kilcykaya (2009), who ponders over the majority of English speakers who belong to the outer/expanding circle and have crafted their own grammatical rules and norms. For example, similar to certain speakers in the UK who have crafted their own rules depending on the region (Millroy, J & Millroy, L 1993), Bhatt (2005) provides an example of Indian English (an outer circle variety), in which tag questions differ considerably from American or British English. What this means is that even among L1 English countries there are an abundance of differences; thus, it appears hypocritical to claim outer/inner circle varieties of English are wrong – and obviously these claims have potentially severe implications for English learners. As a result, Wicaksono (2013) proposes that it is not only L2 English speakers’ responsibility to be intelligible when conversing, but, as there are so many varieties of English worldwide and it has become a medium for global communication in general, it is under no ownership and thus ‘native-speakers’ have a responsibility in using and understanding a global English such as EFL, without negative perceptions.

In conclusion, I explored a variety of ideologies shared and imposed by ‘native-speakers’ concerning a ‘pure’ form of English which learners should abide by. Furthermore, although it was found that these ideologies are essentially groundless myths, they are even adopted and prescribed in learning materials. As a result, the gravity of these ideologies and prescriptions of a ‘pure’ form of English were evident among many of the students I taught in Japan, which eventually began to frustrate them and cause a variety of undesirable issues as they could not attain ‘native-speaker’ status. Although there is evidence which shows that language anxiety is common among language learners, and concerns over performance can lead to L2 gains, the anxiety and pressure my students experienced in their ‘native-speaker’ pursuit manifested in the form of dangerous perfectionist attitudes. As a result, I argued that as there are an abundance of Englishes, not just on a global level, but even among L1 English countries, prescribers of a ‘pure’ form of English are essentially contradicting themselves and every English is equal. More-so, if these prescribers begin to realise how groundless their claims are, perhaps learners would not be influenced and would be free to focus on communicating. Finally, as English is not under anyone’s ownership and all forms are equal, it was suggested that English communication is two-fold: ‘native’ and non-native English users both have a responsibility in understanding each over.

References:

Bhatt, R. (2005) Expert discourses, local practices, and hybridity: the case of Indian Englishes. In: Canagarajah, S. ed. Reclaiming the local in language policy and practice. New Jersey, Erlbaum Associates, pp. 25-54.

Cook, V. (2016) Second Language Learning and Language Teaching. 5th ed. [Internet] New York, Routledge. Available from https://www.dawsonera.com/abstract/9781315883113 [Accessed 20th February 2018].

Dunham, W. (2015) Immigrants in U.S. should ‘speak American’: Ex-VP nominee Palin. Reuters [Internet], 6^th September. Available from https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-palin/immigrants-in-u-s-should-speak-american-ex-vp-nominee-palin-idUSKCN0R60WV20150906 [Accessed 16th February 2018].

Elliot, A. R. (1995) Foreign language phonology: field independence, attitude, and the success of formal instruction in Spanish pronunciation. The Modern Language Journal, 79 (4), pp. 530-542. Available from 

Gardner, R. and MacIntyre, P. (1993) On the measurement of affective variables in second language learning. Language Learning. 43 (2), pp. 157-194. A

Hall, C. Smith, P. and Wicaksono, R. (2017) Mapping applied linguistics: a guide for students and practitioners. 2^nd ed. London, Routledge.

Horwitz, E. (1988) The beliefs about language learning of beginning university foreign language students. The Modern Language Journal. 72 (3), pp. 283-295. 

Kilickaya, F. (2009) World Englishes, English as an international language and applied linguistics. English Language Teaching [Internet], 2 (3), pp. 35-38. Available from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1083080.pdf [Accessed 19th February 2018].

MacIntyre, P. and Gardner, R. (1994) The subtle effects of language anxiety on cognitive processing in the second language. Language Learning, 44 (2), pp. 283–305. 

MacLure, M. (2003) Discourse in educational and social research. Milton Keynes, Open University Press.

Milroy, J. and Milroy, L. (1993) Real English: the grammar of English dialects in the British Isles. London, Longman.

Milroy, J. and Milroy, L. (1985) Authority in Language [Internet]. Routledge. Available from https://moodle.yorksj.ac.uk/pluginfile.php/753483/mod_resource/content/2/milroy%20complaint%20tradition%20new.pdf [Accessed 17^th February 2018]. 

Onwuegbuzie, A. Bailey, P. and Daley, C. (1999) Factors associated with foreign language anxiety. Applied Psycholinguistics, 20 (2), pp. 217-239. 

Walker, R. (2010) Teaching the pronunciation of English as a Lingua Franca. Oxford handbooks for language teachers. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Wicaksono, R. (2013) Raising students’ awareness of the construction of communicative (in)competence in international classrooms. In: Ryan, J. ed. Cross cultural teaching and learning for home and international students: Internationalisation of pedagogy and curriculum in Higher Education [Internet]. London: Routledge, pp. 241-250. Available from https://capitadiscovery.co.uk/yorksj/items/89028?query=Cross+cultural+teaching+and+learning+for+home+and+international+students%3A+Internationalisation+of+pedagogy+and+curriculum+in+Higher+Education&resultsUri=items%3Fquery%3DCross%2Bcultural%2Bteaching%2Band%2Blearning%2Bfor%2Bhome%2Band%2Binternational%2Bstudents%253A%2BInternationalisation%2Bof%2Bpedagogy%2Band%2Bcurriculum%2Bin%2BHigher%2BEducation%26facet%255B0%255D%3Dfulltext%253Ayes%26target%3Dcatalogue&facet%5B0%5D=fulltext%3Ayes&target=catalogue [Accessed 15^th February 2018].

What should we actually be including in L2 English teaching materials?

If you read my think piece and watched my presentation on the ‘native-speaker’ topic, you would know that students who attempt to pursue it are rarely ever successful, and only end up harming their learning in the long-term. As a result, it begs the question: how can we teach learners to be successful L2 English users and not imitation ‘native-speakers’?

To achieve this, learners should be introduced to a wide-variety of authentic materials early, which showcase authentic and successful English communication between various English speakers (‘native’ and non-native) around the globe. Through this, learners will begin to understand that L2 users can – and do – communicate successfully. In addition, as learners begin to realise there are multiple accents among even ‘native-speakers’, they will not only improve their listening skills as they familiarise themselves with a diverse range, but will also benefit in aiding their understanding that there is not one ‘native-speaker’ model to follow.

From my personal experience, the above has been implemented successfully with impressive results: during my 1-year period of teaching English in Japan, one of the schools I worked at used a book series which contained all the above. The series: Let’s talk, contained a variety of accents from non-native and ‘native' speakers, and featured L2-L2, L1-L2 English speakers communicating in an authentic setting with authentic language. I was very surprised when I first started teaching at the school, as learners were able to complete these listening exercises with ease as a result of being more than comfortable with a variety of accents!

In conclusion, make sure your teaching materials feature the above criteria! If us teachers can show students from an early stage in their learning that there is no reliable ‘native-speaker’ model, we will stand a better chance in steering them clear of the potential dangers the ‘native-speaker’ pursuit can entail!

What should we actually be including in L2 English teaching materials? Part 2

Following on from my previous discussion, where I advocated and suggested the use of materials which evidence successful L2 users globally, I want to suggest a further teaching material we can use to bring out the best in L2 English users: corpus-aided language learning.

A corpus is essentially a databank which contains a variety of natural, authentic texts from real-life situations (written or transcribed from oral conversations). The benefits of a corpus is that it allows learners to focus on and analyse what is perhaps as important as competency in grammar and phonetics: register. Register – which is essentially how language differs depending on the setting, interlocuters and the type of conversation (spoken vs written) – can be observed in all types of different scenarios on corpora: media usages, casual conversation, academic writing, fiction stories etc. More-so, as there are corpora which specialise in different varieties of English – American English & British English, for example – teachers have yet another teaching material which exposes learners to Global Englishes.

To demonstrate the effectiveness of natural speech examples in pedagogy, this study used a compilation of L2-L2 academic speech to help L2 English-speaking university students in America attain discussion skills required for their degrees. The results of which were extremely impressive: students were able to benefit from the analysis of contextual language, reflect on the language they use in their performances, and develop an understanding of the language used in academic discussions.

In conclusion, through corpora or similar authentic speech examples, us teachers can provide learners with not only another example of the variety of Englishes that exist, but also the ways in which language differs depending on register – an extremely vital part of mastering a language!

Native-speakerism in the English teaching profession: right or wrong?

Link to full advert.

By now, most of you who are reading this – potential English teachers in the near-future – must have stumbled upon similar adverts crying out for ‘native-speakers’ of English to come and teach at their institutions. Such an attitude directly correlates with the native-speakerism ideology: “the established belief that ‘native-speaker’ teachers represent a ‘Western culture’ from which spring the ideals both of the English language and of English language teaching methodology” – almost word-for-word the same opinion two of my employers in Japan held... Obviously, this would suggest that ‘native-speakers’ are vastly more competent, desirable and beneficial for English learners than their L2- English speaking counterparts. However, is there actually any truth to this?

Most associations that plead for ‘native-speaker’ only teachers assume that, as they are ‘masters’ of English grammar and pronunciation, they are perfect models for students to strive towards  – in terms of pronunciation, a belief that a considerable number of English learners have also voiced. Perhaps there are some benefits – certainly not the above as we will see momentarily – for learners the ‘native-speaker’ teacher can provide, such as knowing the L2 culture from the inside; and, if you have read my previous blog posts, you would know that register, or how language differs depending on the situation and interlocuters, is an important aspect of language – an aspect ‘native-speakers’ may have more knowledge of. Other beliefs which hold ‘native-speakers’ on a pedestal concern a more natural language acquisition akin to how children acquire their first language, as the ‘native-speaker’ may not know the L1 of the students; a belief which some also view as beneficial as purely L1 teaching 'may' help learners to separate the two languages in their minds.

Unfortunately, this is where the well dries up for ‘native-speakerism’ advocates, and the pros listed for ‘native-speakers’ are controversial. Firstly, although ‘native speakers’ have spoken the L1 since childhood, most may not even be able to – because of having little or no teaching experience or qualifications – teach the language adequately compared to their non-native counterparts. This is a key consideration that students themselves have voiced: if the teacher is competent in English and qualified, it does not matter to me. More-so, with the abundance of accents ‘native-speakers’ possess, which model should learners strive towards in terms of pronunciation? Also, if we are talking about good models for learners to aspire towards, surely the L2 teacher – one who has learnt English to a competent level; knows the L1 culture and what its learners would respond well to; and is an example of what L2 learners should aspire to be (successful L2 users and not imitation L1 speakers) – would be the ultimate model. Additionally, SLA research has found nothing to prove that the classroom should be purely L1 based – with learners even reporting that non-native teachers are beneficial as they can explain difficult English grammar in their L1. Finally, the argument concerning learners being confused if two languages are stored is just one of the groundless commonly believed myths circulating throughout the TESOL world.

Overall, there are very few concrete arguments for the ‘native-speakerism’ ideology – and the ones which have been presented here are controversial at best. Conversely, non-native English teachers bring a plethora of desirable and unique qualities to the table, which can aid learners in more ways than ‘native-speakers’ can. Potential non-natives who are reading this and are thinking of going into the English teaching profession: fear not. It appears companies – as seen below – are starting to realise some of the arguments posited here and are revising their teacher requirements somewhat. 

Link to full advert

(Embedding a link in an image appears to be bugged on this version of Mahara; please use the links beside images to access them).

Can you find motivation in the form of a successful L2 non-native teacher?

Have you ever looked up to a ‘native-speaker’ teacher of a personally desirable language, only to be frustrated at say, not being able to achieve a level of grammatical and phonetic competence which matches theirs? I certainly have: during my language learning journey of Japanese I studied under a ‘native-speaker’ for a year, and all I could focus on was attaining a ‘native’ level of competence akin to them. Unfortunately, all these fixations on ‘native-speakers’ as role models led me down a dark road, littered with feelings of failure and despair. If you have read my think piece and watched my presentation on the ‘native-speaker’ topic, you will know that this pursuit is not exactly realistic, and often leads to language anxiety and motivation issues. Perhaps then, learners like myself would do well with a more realistic role model – a successful non-native L2 teacher?

This idea is based on the L2 motivational self system theory – adapted from a pre-existing theory into a language learning framework – which suggests that a person who speaks an L2 competently can act as an Ideal L2 self, i.e. someone who possesses all the language attributes learners like myself strive for. Additionally, this Ideal L2 self is posited to be an intense motivator, as learners aim to reduce the distance in terms of language skill between themselves and the person they are trying to become. This is in stark contrast to a ‘native-speaker’ role model, which embodies the language attributes one believes one ought-to possess to avoid negative or disappointing outcomes (i.e. one must have ‘native’ like language skills to carry out L2 dreams). Somewhat like my previous blog post, it is further suggested that seeing someone similar to oneself (e.g. an L2 teacher who is an L1 English speaker) succeed, strengthens self-efficacy beliefs and motivation; as one has clear evidence in the form of a similar individual that they are too capable of reaching the same status.

I can personally attest to this theory: during the first year of my language learning journey – before I studied under a ‘native-speaker’ teacher – I studied under an L1 English teacher of Japanese and had a close L1 English friend who was a competent speaker. They both allowed me to develop an Ideal L2 self; thus, giving me the most intense period of motivation and belief I had ever experienced during my degree.

Do not just take my word for it however! A study carried out on Japanese learners of English found some prime examples: Hiro, a recurring Japanese learner in the study, was inspired by a successful Japanese EFL teacher to pursue a similar career and become an international person just like him. Not only this, but the fact a Japanese individual like himself had succeeded and taught English all over the world served as an immense source of motivation in the form an Ideal L2 self; he now had solid proof that he too was capable.

In conclusion, the theories and evidence presented here – and in my previous blog – should serve as a solid reminder that non-native teachers possess unique motivating and teaching capabilities that essentially outshine ‘native-speaker’ teachers. By being a non-native speaker, you can successfully provide a unique and realistic role model of what your students are aiming to be – successful L2 users.

(Please note the image used here was searched for Google’s ‘free to use and share’ advanced search function. For a full list of references, visit my bibliography in the word commentary).

Word Commentary: The ‘native-speaker’ image in English language learning and the effects on motivation & anxiety.

Overall, I have chosen to focus my portfolio on a topic which has been a prevalent and recurring theme throughout my degree: the ‘native-speaker’ image and how it has affected English learners’ profiles and aspiring non-native teachers. I have chosen to compose my portfolio of academic pieces, as I have catered my theme for potential English teachers – such as my peers who should already have some existing knowledge on the topics. As I have only recently changed my degree to Linguistics & TESOL, I have not had the chance to study some of the more intricate Linguistic modules; however, I have connected and reflected upon a wide variety of first-third year modules. 

Think-piece: Is the ‘native-speaker’ pursuit desirable?

The think-piece draws on aspects of Attitudes to Language (3LL202): the complaint tradition to examine the prescription and ideologies of a perceived ‘correct’ English ‘native-speakers’, figures in popular discourse and language textbooks spread to English learners. Subsequently, using Applied Linguistics for Language Teaching (1LL203), I scrutinise these views and ideologies and establish whether they are legitimate claims or truthless myths. Following on, I use my experience from Languages in the Workplace (2LA031) – where I taught English in Japan – to recount first-hand experience of the ways in which these views and ideologies spread to learners I taught, and formed their damaging ‘native-speaker’ pursuit. Next, using experience from Theories and Methodologies in TESOL (3LL200), I scrutinise the anxiety, communication and motivation these learners suffered as a result of their ‘native-speaker’ pursuit, and determine it is doing considerably more harm than good. Finally, I use Grammar and Phonetics (3LL205): English, whose rules? to further argue that prescribers of a ‘correct’ English are wrong as there are an abundance of grammatical and phonetic differences not just in the outer/expanding circle, but also in the inner circle; and how if they themselves would realise these facts, English learners would not be persuaded to attempt a ‘native-speaker’ pursuit. 

Overall, the think-piece is aimed at potential/current English language teachers, and advises them through a critical analysis not to subscribe or fall victim to the prescriptions of a ‘correct’ English as it does more harm than good. Potential/current language teachers can also use parts of the think-piece to remind students in their teaching that there is no ‘native-speaker’ model anyway.

I would thoroughly recommend reading this first, as it functions as a ‘gateway’ into the topic before the presentation which is more technical.

Presentation: Is the ‘native-speaker’ pursuit attainable?

The presentation’s main focus is on two exchange students I encountered during Grammar & Phonetics (3LL205) and Theories and Methodologies in TESOL (3LL200); and the ways in which the ‘native-speaker’ image, and when they realised this wasn’t attainable, affected their learner profiles. To achieve this, I start by using Attitudes to Language (3LL202): attitudes to language learning to analyse the reasons they (and obviously this can extend to other learners) were motivated extrinsically and intrinsically to learn English; and make a comparison with the attitudes of British language learners, for example (3:19 - 6:43). However, although these learners were extremely motivated and evidenced competent levels of English, they developed a low Willingness to Communicate (MacIntyre et al. 1998) – a theory which I encountered during Theories and Methodologies (3LL200) – as a result of pressures to attain a ‘native-speaker’ level; and ultimately began withdrawing from the L1 English environment they so longingly desired to be a part of (6:44 - 10:11). To make matters worse, both learners WTC worsened when they could not attain ‘native’ like ability; they expressed the ways in which their accent and origin were holding them back (6:44 - 10:11). I then analyse their views using Applied Linguistics for Language Teaching (1LL203) and discover more correlation with commonly believed myths which also link to public discourse prescription (10:12 - 15:15). Next, if teachers are not already convinced that ‘native-speaker’ level is unattainable, I explore in depth the ways in which grammatical (15:16 - 20:46) and phonetic (20:47 - 24:55) barriers will never see learners attain it (Grammar and Phonetics & Theories and methodologies, but much more further readings). Finally, I end the presentation with thoughts and implications for English teachers to consider when teaching: just because students cannot attain ‘native-speaker’ level, it does not mean they cannot be competent L2 learners (24:57 - 29:47).

Overall, much like the think-piece, I chose to aim this at potential/current language teachers to not only further demonstrate that the ‘native-speaker’ pursuit is detrimental, but also to show that despite it being unattainable, TESOL theoretical understanding evidences that they can still be successful L2 English users. The presentation is lengthy – not too lengthy if the introduction (00:00 - 3:18) and conclusion (29:49 - 31:58) are not being factored – but when designing it I envisioned myself giving a comprehensive lecture-style presentation on three years’ worth of knowledge and experience.

I would thoroughly recommend watching this before reading the reflective blog posts, as they are a supplement and follow-on from the presentation.  

Reflective blog posts

Firstly, I chose to make two blog posts which act as a supplement to the think-piece and presentation: they draw on experiences from my year abroad teaching in Japan as well as Grammar and Phonetics (3LL205) & Theories and Methodologies (3LL200) to suggest what we should actually be including in our English teaching materials to help our students become successful L2 English users.

The next blog post deals with ‘native-speaker’ teachers vs ‘non-native’ teachers of English; it compares the benefits each group can offer learners – in which it is clear that ‘native-speaker’ teachers are in no way superior or have any advantages. I chose to do this post as I have encountered a lot of potential non-native speakers who are worried as a result of English language schools pleading for ‘native-speakers’; thus, they felt incompetent comparatively. This post draws on Languages in the Workplace (2LA031), Theories and Methodologies (3LL200) & Applied Linguistics for Language Teaching (1LL203).

Finally, my last post explores further benefits the ‘non-native’ speaker teacher can provide L2 English students in the form of enhanced motivation as they are living proof of ‘non-native’ speakers being successful. I draw on my experiences of being motivated by proficient L1 English teachers/friends of Japanese, and integrate it with a theory I encountered during my reading for Dissertation: Linguistics and TESOL (3LL212).

I thoroughly recommend reading the blog posts in the above order, as they draw/relate to the previous post(s).

Bibliography

Bandura, A. (1994) Self-Efficacy. In: Ramachaudran, V. ed. Encyclopedia of human behavior vol. 4. New York, Academic Press, pp. 71-81.

Bhatt, R. (2005) Expert discourses, local practices, and hybridity: the case of Indian Englishes. In: Canagarajah, S. ed. Reclaiming the local in language policy and practice. New Jersey, Erlbaum Associates, pp. 25-54.

Browne, KC. (2016) Raters’ accent-familiarity levels and their effects on pronunciation scores and intelligibly on high-stakes English tests. PhD thesis, University of Leicester.

Cheng, TP. (2016) Authentic L2 interactions as material for a pragmatic awareness-raising activity. Language Awareness, 25 (3), pp. 159-178.

Coleman, J. (2009) Why the British do not learn languages: myths and motivation in the United Kingdom [Internet]. Available from http://oro.open.ac.uk/23568/1/Coleman_2009_Why_the_British_do_not_learn_languages.pdf [Accessed 28th February 2018].

Cook, V. (2016) Second Language Learning and Language Teaching. 5th ed. [Internet], New York, Routledge. Available from https://www.dawsonera.com/abstract/9781315883113 [Accessed 20th February 2018].

Davies, M. (2008-). [Internet] The Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA): 520 million words, 1990-present. Available from https://corpus.byu.edu/coca/ [Accessed 13^th March 2018].

DeKeyser, R. (2000) The robustness of critical period effects in second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22 (4), pp. 499-535.

Derwing, T. Munro, M (2015) Pronunciation fundamentals: evidence-based perspectives for L2 teaching and research. Language learning & language teaching 42. Amsterdam, John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Derwing, T. and Munro, M. (1997) Accent, Intelligibility, and Comprehensibility: Evidence from four L1s. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19 (1), pp. 1–16.

Derwing, T. Thomson, R. and Munro, M. (2006) English pronunciation and fluency development in Mandarin and Slavic speakers. System: An International Journal of Educational Technology and Applied Linguistics, 34 (2), pp. 183-193.

Dörnyei, Z. (2005) The psychology of the language learner: individual differences in second language acquisition [Internet]. Mahwah, Erlbaum. Available from https://capitadiscovery.co.uk/yorksj/items/70191?query=dornyei&resultsUri=items%3Fquery%3Ddornyei%26target%3Dcatalogue%26facet%255B0%255D%3Dfulltext%253Ayes&facet%5B0%5D=fulltext%3Ayes&target=catalogue [Accessed 13^th March 2018].

Dunham, W. (2015) Immigrants in U.S. should ‘speak American’: Ex-VP nominee Palin. Reuters [Internet], 6^th September. Available from https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-palin/immigrants-in-u-s-should-speak-american-ex-vp-nominee-palin-idUSKCN0R60WV20150906 [Accessed 16th February 2018].

Elliot, A. R. (1995) Foreign language phonology: field independence, attitude, and the success of formal instruction in Spanish pronunciation. The Modern Language Journal. 79 (4), pp. 530-542.

Ellis, R. and Barkhuizen G. (2005) Analysing Learner Language. Oxford, Oxford University Press. Available from https://www.dawsonera.com/readonline/9780203080023 [Accessed 3rd March 2018].

Ellis, C, N. and Wulff, S. (2015) Usage-based approaches to SLA. In: VanPatten, B. & Williams, J. ed. Theories in Second Language Acquisition: An Introduction [Internet]. 2^nd ed. New York, Routledge, pp. 75-93. Available from https://ebookcentral-proquest-com.yorksj.idm.oclc.org/lib/yorksj/reader.action?docID=1829286&ppg=88 [Accessed 9^th March 2018].

Gardner, R. and MacIntyre, P. (1993) On the measurement of affective variables in second language learning. Language Learning [Internet], 43 (2), pp. 157-194. Available from http://faculty.cbu.ca/pmacintyre/research_pages/journals/affect_l2learn1993.pdf [Accessed 19th February 2018].

Hall, C. & Reyes, D, A. (2009) Cross-linguistic influence in L2 verb frames: The effects of word familiarity and language proficiency. In: Benati, G, M. ed. Issues in Second Language Proficiency [Internet]. London, Continuum, pp. 24-44. Available from http://lib.myilibrary.com.yorksj.idm.oclc.org/Open.aspx?id=229703 [Accessed 7^th March 2018]. 

Hall, C. Smith, P. and Wicaksono, R. (2017) Mapping applied linguistics: a guide for students and practitioners. 2^nd ed. London, Routledge.

Han, T. Tanriöver, A. and Sahan, Ö. (2016) EFL students' and teachers' attitudes toward foreign language speaking anxiety: A look at NESTs and non-NESTs. International Education Studies. [Internet], 9 (3), pp. 1-11. Available from https://capitadiscovery.co.uk/yorksj/items/eds/eric/EJ1093341?query=HAN%2C+TANRI%C3%96VER+and+SAHAN&resultsUri=items%3Fquery%3DHAN%252C%2BTANRI%25C3%2596VER%2Band%2BSAHAN%26facet%255B0%255D%3Dfulltext%253Ayes%26target%3Deds&facet%5B0%5D=fulltext%3Ayes&target=eds [Accessed March 12^th 2018].

Hiraga, Y. (2005) British attitudes towards six varieties of English in the USA and Britain. World Englishes [Internet], 24 (3), pp. 289-308. Available from https://capitadiscovery.co.uk/yorksj/items/eds/edsbl/RN172068337?query=British+attitudes+towards+six+varieties+of+English+in+the+USA+and+Britain&resultsUri=items%3Fquery%3DBritish%2Battitudes%2Btowards%2Bsix%2Bvarieties%2Bof%2BEnglish%2Bin%2Bthe%2BUSA%2Band%2BBritain%26facet%255B0%255D%3Dfulltext%253Ayes%26target%3Deds&facet%5B0%5D=fulltext%3Ayes&target=eds [Accessed 20^th February 2018].

Holliday, A. (2005) The struggle to teach English as an international language [Internet]. Oxford, Oxford University Press. Available from https://books.google.co.uk/books/about/The_Struggle_to_Teach_English_as_an_Inte.html?id=APSdBgAAQBAJ&redir_esc=y [Accessed March 12^th 2018].

Horwitz, E. (1988) The beliefs about language learning of beginning university foreign language students. The Modern Language Journal. 72 (3), pp. 283-295.

Jones, L. (2007) Let’s talk 2. 2^nd ed. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

Keck, C. K. Kim, Y. (2014) Pedagogical grammar. Amsterdam, John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Kilickaya, F. (2009) World Englishes, English as an international language and applied linguistics. English Language Teaching [Internet], 2 (3), pp. 35-38. Available from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1083080.pdf [Accessed 19th February 2018].

Krashen, S. D. (1982) Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition [Internet]. Pergamon Press Inc. Available from http://www.sdkrashen.com/content/books/principles_and_practice.pdf [Accessed 5th March 1982].

Krieger, D. (2003) Corpus Linguistics: What It Is and How It Can Be Applied to Teaching. The Internet TESL Journal [Internet], 9 (3). Available from http://iteslj.org/Articles/Krieger-Corpus.html [Accessed 14th March 2018].

Levis, J. (2005) Changing contexts and shifting paradigms in pronunciation teaching. TESOL Quarterly [Internet], 39 (3), pp. 369-377. Available from https://capitadiscovery.co.uk/yorksj/items/eds/edsjsr/edsjsr.10.2307.3588485?query=Changing+Contexts+and+Shifting+Paradigms+in+Pronunciation+Teaching&resultsUri=items%3Fquery%3DChanging%2BContexts%2Band%2BShifting%2BParadigms%2Bin%2BPronunciation%2BTeaching%26facet%255B0%255D%3Dfulltext%253Ayes%26target%3Deds&facet%5B0%5D=fulltext%3Ayes&target=eds [Accessed 12^th March 2018].

Lifey Missions (2017) Irish accent vs Scottish accent vs British accent + sayings (funny) [Internet video]. Available from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmxuW0RS0lE [Accessed 11^th March 2018].

Lightbrown, M. P. & Spada, M. (2013) How Language are Learned. 4^th ed. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

MacIntyre, P.  Dornyei, Z. Clement, R. and Noels, K. (1988) Conceptualizing Willingness to Communicate in a l2: a situational model of L2 confidence and affiliation.  The Modern Language Journal, 82 (4), pp. 545-562.

MacIntyre, P. and Gardner, R. (1994) The subtle effects of language anxiety on cognitive processing in the second language. Language Learning, 44 (2), pp. 283–305.

MacLure, M. (2003) Discourse in educational and social research. Milton Keynes, Open University Press.

Markus, H. and Nurius, P. (1986) Possible Selves. American Psychologist, 41 (9), pp. 954-969.

Milroy, J. & Milroy, L. (1993) Real English: the grammar of English dialects in the British Isles. London, Longman.

Milroy, J. & Milroy, L. (1985) Authority in Language [Internet]. Routledge. Available from https://moodle.yorksj.ac.uk/pluginfile.php/753483/mod_resource/content/2/milroy%20complaint%20tradition%20new.pdf [Accessed 17^th February 2018]. 

Modern Language Association of America (no date) Benefits of Language Learning [Internet]. Available from https://www.mla.org/Resources/Advocacy/Infographics/Infographic-Benefits-of-Language-Learning [Accessed 2nd March 2018].

Muir, C. and Dörnyei, Z. (2013) Directed Motivation Currents: using vision to create effective motivational pathways. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching. 3 (3), pp. 357-375.

Munro, M. and Derwing, T. (2008) Segmental acquisition in Adult ESL learners: a longitudinal study of vowel production. Language Learning, 58 (3), pp. 479-502.

Munro, M. and Mann, V. (2005) Age of immersion as a predictor of foreign accent. Applied Psycholinguistics [Internet], 26 (3), pp. 311-341. Available from https://www-cambridge-org.yorksj.idm.oclc.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/EB8DAE82BC1152B91E9EC7A2BE929B23/S0142716405050198a.pdf/age_of_immersion_as_a_predictor_of_foreign_accent.pdf  [Accessed 7^th March 2018].

Murray, G. (2011) Imagination, Metacognition and the L2 self in a self-access learning environment. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 3 (3), pp. 377-396.

Onwuegbuzie, A. Bailey, P. and Daley, C. (1999) Factors associated with foreign language anxiety. Applied Psycholinguistics, 20 (2), pp. 217-239. 

Ortega, L. (2009) Understanding Second Language Acquisition. [Internet] London, Hodder Education. Available from https://www.dawsonera.com/abstract/9781444117059 [Accessed 19th February 2018].

Schmidt, R. and Watanabe, Y. (2001) Motivation, strategy use, and pedagogical preferences in foreign language learning. In: Dornyei, Z. and Schmidt, R. ed. Motivation and second language acquisition. Honolulu, University of Hawaii, pp. 313-359.

Sheldon, K. and Elliot, A. (1999) Goal striving, Need satisfaction, and Longitudinal Well-Being: The Self-Concordance Model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76 (3), pp. 482-497. 

Strange, W. and Dittmann, S. (1984) Effects of discrimination training on the perception of /r-l/ by Japanese adults learning English. Perception & Psycholinguistics, 36 (2), pp. 131-145.

Suenobu, M. Kanzaki, K. and Yamane, S. (1992) An Experimental Study of Intelligibility of Japanese English. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 30 (2), pp. 146-156.

TEFL Professional Network Ltd (1997-) [Internet]. Available from https://www.tefl.com [Accessed 13^th March 2018].

The British National Corpus, version 3 (2007) [Internet]. Available from http://www.natcorp.ox.ac.uk/cpr.xml?ID=reference [Accessed March 14^th 2018].

Thomson, R. and Derwing, T. (2014) The effectiveness of L2 pronunciation instruction: a narrative review. Applied Linguistics [Internet], 36 (3), pp. 326-344. Available from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271827649_The_Effectiveness_of_L2_Pronunciation_Instruction_A_Narrative_Review [Accessed 10th March 2018].

Timmis, I. (2005) Towards a framework for teaching spoken grammar. ELT Journal, 59 (2), pp. 117-125.

Tsukada, K. Birdsong, D. Bialystok, E. Mack, M. Sung, H. and Flege, J. (2005) A developmental study of English vowel production and perception by native Korean adults and children. Journal of Phonetics [Internet], 33 (3), pp. 263-290. Available from http://www.jimflege.com/files/Tsukada_Birdsong_developmental_study_JP_2005.pdf [Accessed 9th March 2018].

UOE data collection (2015) Foreign language learning in the EU: upper secondary education [Internet]. Available from http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Foreign_language_learning_statistics [Accessed 1st March 2018].

Walker, R. (2010) Teaching the pronunciation of English as a Lingua Franca. Oxford handbooks for language teachers. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Werker, J. and Tees, R. (2002) Cross-language speech perception: evidence for perceptual reorganization during the first year of life. Infant Behavior & Development, 25 (1), pp. 121-133.

Wicaksono, R. (2013) Raising students’ awareness of the construction of communicative (in)competence in international classrooms. In: Ryan, J. ed. Cross cultural teaching and learning for home and international students: Internationalisation of pedagogy and curriculum in Higher Education [Internet]. London: Routledge, pp. 241-250. Available from https://capitadiscovery.co.uk/yorksj/items/89028?query=Cross+cultural+teaching+and+learning+for+home+and+international+students%3A+Internationalisation+of+pedagogy+and+curriculum+in+Higher+Education&resultsUri=items%3Fquery%3DCross%2Bcultural%2Bteaching%2Band%2Blearning%2Bfor%2Bhome%2Band%2Binternational%2Bstudents%253A%2BInternationalisation%2Bof%2Bpedagogy%2Band%2Bcurriculum%2Bin%2BHigher%2BEducation%26facet%255B0%255D%3Dfulltext%253Ayes%26target%3Dcatalogue&facet%5B0%5D=fulltext%3Ayes&target=catalogue [Accessed 15^th February 2018].