Pronunciation and identification in L2

58

Additionally, speakers may use linguistic variants as resources for signalling affiliation towards groups with which they wish to identify. Applying Wenger‟s (1998) notion of community of practice, Eckert (2000) investigated how adolescents signalled their group identity by the use of an innovative vowel system emerging in the northern cities of the USA. These youths belonged to and overtly defined themselves as part of groups whose members were all engaged in various well-defined social activities, spent a considerable time in the company of one another and interacted amongst themselves on a regular basis. Eckert (2000) denoted such groups as linguistic communities of practice.

In sum, the research of L1 English pronunciation evolved from the description of an ideal speaker to the investigation of varieties and their significance from the point of view of speakers, focusing on the role of language in expressing a person‟s identity. The subsequent section aims to pinpoint parallel tendencies with regard to SLA research, EFL learning and ELF use.

non-59

native speakers‟ competence of English was viewed in terms of interlanguage (Selinker, 1972), a series of transitory phases along a continuum between their L1 and the native speaker variety of L2 to be mastered.

However, similarly to the attitudes towards L1 variation, the description of natural variation and the acknowledgement of its legitimacy by scholars did not grant L2 varieties the same status in EFL and ELT as that enjoyed by the established ENL varieties, in this case, Standard British and American English (cf. Illés & Csizér, 2010). Empirical research into the norms and standards of non-native English suggest that in ELT, native-like linguistic forms, such as native-like pronunciation, carry a prestige value, being indicative of a successful learner, while the use of non-native linguistic features is despised by many teachers and learners (Andreasson, 1994; Jenkins, 2007; Murray, 2003). Therefore, it can be said that differences in L2 English are still widely viewed as deficiencies.

In addition, the relationship of language variation, attitudes and identity in L2 is more complex and controversial than in L1 English. While there is consensus among sociolinguistics that language variation plays an important role in expressing speakers‟ identity in L1, there are opposing views as to this role of language with regard to ELF. Firth (1996) defines ELF as “a

„contact language‟ between persons who share neither a common native tongue nor a common (national) culture, and for whom English is the chosen foreign language of communication”

(Firth, 1996, p. 240). This definition suggests that the sole function of ELF is that its speakers can make themselves understood when communicating with people of different mother tongues.

House (2003) also considers ELF essentially a tool for communication, which does not pose a threat to the L1 by taking over its functions in people‟s personal life since it is a “language for communication” as opposed to a “language for identification” (House, 2003, pp.559–650). On

60

the other hand, Dörnyei Csizér and Németh (2006) argue, using Arnett‟s (2002) concept of global identity, that as an international language, English may be used to convey one‟s sense of belonging to a global community, while speakers‟ L1 can serve for expressing their local identity. In a similar vein, Walker (2010) points out that the transfer of an L1 accent into ELF can serve the purpose of communicating national identities through English.

The reason behind the contradictory views above may be that the authors attribute different significance to ELF in speakers‟ lives. When English serves as a tool for basic communication or it is regarded primarily as a school subject, the role of identification of the language can be somewhat limited. By contrast, if ELF is an integral part of speakers‟ life, it is likely to function in a similar fashion to an L1, whereby it can be used in day-to-day interactions for expressing the complex identities of its speakers. Therefore, it can be said that the use of ELF does not necessarily entail the expression of identity through language but it only provides an opportunity for speakers to utilise it for identification.

Jenkins (2007) shows that the expression of identity through English is prevalent among non-native teachers of English, yet instead of a global or a national identity, they strive to express a professional identity by approximating ENL. The non-native teachers‟ evaluation of a range of native and non-native accents of English shows a preference for the US and UK variety, with a higher preference for the latter. By contrast, non-native accents are rated lower than the two established native accents despite the perceived intelligibility and, in some cases, the pleasantness of the non-native accent. This demonstrates that teachers show a paradoxical professional identity through their judgements of accents as they highly value the US and UK English accent, which they deem authentic English, while they show negative attitudes towards non-native accents, to which their own English accent belongs. The teachers‟ account following

61

the survey reveal that the reasons for these seemingly conflicting identities is that although they are inclined to use their ELF accent to express their own identities, professional expectations from parents, learners and employers make them feel compelled to express a professional identity by conforming to ENL accents.

Concerning role of identity in L2 English in different contexts, a distinction can be made between language learning in schools and the use of ELF outside the classroom. In expanding circle countries (Kachru, 1992), L2 speakers are initiated into using English through ELT, which is currently dominated by native-speaker standards and ideologies (Widdowson, 1994). This is likely to exert a strong influence on learners‟ attitudes towards native and non-native varieties, attributing a prestige value to ENL variants while EFL features might be stigmatised. However, using English for communication outside school yields a different context for ELF, where meanings and values are likely to be reconstructed and renegotiated, providing an opportunity to express L2 speakers‟ complex identities as members of particular ELF communities.

Nevertheless, whether or to what extent language values and identities formulated during language learning are transferred to ELF use outside school remains a question.

It may be argued that with English becoming an important means of everyday communication to an increasing number of ELF speakers, similarly to L1, the sociolinguistic significance of pronunciation may became more and more of a central issue in L2 language use.

While an L1 is used as an expression of local or national identity through language, English may become a means of expressing one‟s identity as a member of a global community depending of the role of English in the speakers‟ life.

Applying the Social Connotation Hypothesis (Trudgill & Giles, 1972) to L2 contexts, it can be argued that variants in L2 can be invested with the role of markers signalling personal

62

affiliations or group identities similarly to the way it is done in L1 English. The sociolinguistic meaning of markers, such as features of particular native English varieties or ones transferred from an L1, can be reinterpreted depending on the context. For example, the various realisations of the TH sound, in words such as think, as [f], [t] or [s] may be interpreted not as failed attempts to emulate the standard ENL pronunciation but as characteristic features of different non-native speech communities of ELF. In ELF, these meanings and the prestige values associated with variants are likely to change fluidly driven by the dynamics of the local contexts on a social as well as a personal level, similarly to Estuary English in ENL. However, contrary to the Social Connotation Hypothesis in L1, in L2 contexts, the meaning of these features is not purely a matter of local convention, but it is influenced by norms of the wider community of English speakers and norms prevalent in ELT.

Furthermore, analogous to L1 language users, ELF speakers may also use English to project a desired self-image either as proficient speaker of a foreign language or as a professional member of a community of practice whose language of communication is English (cf.

Widdowson, 1997; Dörnyei et al., 2006). In an ELT context, affective aspects of language, including pronunciation in particular, can bear significance to learner‟s motivation as well (cf.

Dörnyei, 2005).

63