TE10003 Article 5

World Englishes, Vol. 30, No. 3, pp. 392408, 2011.
0883-2919
Asian varieties of English: Attitudes towards pronunciation
MINA TOKUMOTO AND MIKI SHIBATA
ABSTRACT: According to previous studies, Japanese EFL learners who wish to acquire American or
British English pronunciation are reluctant to speak their L1-accented English. In view of this tendency,
the present study examined the attitudes of Asian learners toward their L1-accented English. University
students from Japan, South Korea, and Malaysia evaluated their English pronunciation by responding to
a questionnaire. The results of the survey revealed the extent to which their acceptance of their English
accents differs: the Malaysian students highly valued their accented English, while the Japanese and
Koreans disapproved of their own varieties of English and indicated their preference for native English
pronunciation. In particular, the Japanese participants negative attitude toward their Japanese-accented
English was found to be the greatest among the three groups. The distinct trend among the groups will be
discussed with consideration of the historical and political backgrounds in the societies which might have
impacted on the process of constructing L2 learners language identity. These backgrounds should have a
substantial influence on current educational policy and social actions in each country. Finally, pedagogical
implications for English education in Japan will be argued discussed.
INTRODUCTION
Attitudes are acquired through external influence (Bohner and Wanke 2002). Particular
language attitudes tend to be learned and formed in our social environment, such as by
hearing others refer to some groups or people, including their languages and cultures, in
a certain manner, and through exposure to particular varieties and instructions reflecting
teachers pedagogical beliefs and choices. Language attitudes, then, may lead to L2 learn-
ers stereotyping English and its native speakers (McKenzie 2008a), and may influence
their learning behaviors, including motivation, language practices, and successful attain-
ment of the language. In this sense, it is pedagogically important to uncover learners
language attitudes toward a target language.
English users are often categorized into native speakers (NSs) and non-native speakers
(NNSs); however, it has been pointed out that this view is problematic in terms of equality
and power relations among English users, whereby those who speak English as their native
language are automatically in a position of power as compared with those who have to
learn it as a second or foreign language. Moreover, the dichotomy of the two groups does
not account for the diversity of English in reality. With the worldwide spread of English,
the number of English speakers has been constantly increasing, and frequent contact with
English has promoted English as an international language (EIL), as well as a pluralistic
view of English, referred to as world Englishes. Along with this social phenomenon, some
non-native varieties of English are gaining the status of recognized variants of English,
which has enhanced the development of new varieties of English. Considering this diversity,
Faculty of Education, University of the Ryukyus, 1 Senbaru, Nishihara, Okinawa, 903-0213, Japan. E-mail:
mina_meicai@yahoo.co.jp
(Correspoding author), Faculty of Law and Letters, University of the Ryukyus, 1 Senbaru, Nishihara, Okinawa,
903-0213, Japan. E-mail: mshibata@ll.u-ryukyu.ac.jp

C 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd
Asian varieties of English: Attitudes towards pronunciation 393
the traditional definition of a native speaker fails to refer to those from the Outer Circle
countries, who speak English not only as an official language but also in the home. It is
also inappropriate to use the label non-native speaker for a person who has learned English
as a second or foreign language and achieved bilingual status as a fluent, proficient user.1
With the recognition of the dynamic reality of the global English-speaking community, the
necessity to appreciate the diversity of English has been fostered in the applied linguistic
and English teaching fields. In contrast, however, the dichotomy of NS vs. NNS still affects
learners of English when they judge the value of the English they use: the NNS tend to
endorse a native variety of English and be reluctant to accept their own and other non-native
varieties.
This paper describes a study that investigated how learners of English from Japan,
South Korea, and Malaysia perceived their own English accents. The questionnaire format
was selected in order to elicit their language attitudes. Comparison of the three countries
showing participants distinctive evaluative reactions to their own varieties of English has
indicated that the emphasis in English instruction and social movement in each country
appear to influence users construction of attitudes toward a target language.
Attitudinal studies of Japanese EFL learners

The nativeness paradigm has affected NNSs attitudes toward the English language: their
attitudinal reaction toward localized varieties of English has revealed strong endorsement
for a native variety of English and a relatively negative perception of non-native varieties
of English. (e.g. see Chiba et al. 1995; Crismore et al. 1996; Timmis 2002; Matsuda 2003;
Fraser 2006).
With regard to research conducted with Japanese EFL learners, Chiba et al. (1995)
investigated university students accent perception by rating nine male English speakers
from different L1 backgrounds (i.e. three from Japan, two from America, one from Britain,
and three ESL speakers from Sri Lanka, Hong Kong, and Malaysia, respectively), and
they reported that the Japanese students preferred the American and British accents but
disapproved of the other non-native accents, including the Japanese. The results of an
identification task in which participants guessed the nationality of the nine speakers
suggested that familiarity had led to their endorsement of NSs, but it did not help them to
foster a positive attitude toward Japanese-accented English, to which, it might be assumed,
they had been frequently exposed. Fraser (2006) examined how Japanese high school
students perceived English speakers from six different countries (England, US, Scotland,
Zimbabwe, Taiwan, and Japan), through an accent judgment task and a questionnaire with
attitudinal statements. Her participants valued the American accent as being high status;
on the other hand, a majority of them (94.7%) perceived Japanese English as being easy
to understand, although this does not mean that they either appreciated its accent or had
the desire to achieve it. These results indicated that Japanese students highly value NS
pronunciation, especially as a model in English teaching and learning.
Further investigations have revealed that Japanese EFL learners attitudes toward vari-
eties of English are rather complex: McKenzie (2008a; 2008b) discovered that Japanese
university students positively evaluated the speakers of UK and US English in terms of
competence (intelligent, confident, fluent, clear), whereas they favored a Japanese speaker
whose English is heavily accented in terms of social attractiveness (gentle, pleasant, funny,
modest). McKenzie (2008a; 2008b) concluded that the Japanese participants endorsement

394 Mina Tokumoto and Miki Shibata
of native varieties reflects both the native speaker ideology, in which a native variety of
English is prestigious and correct, and the ingroup affectiveness or solidarity, since they
also speak the Japanese-accented English. This complex process of recognizing a language
variety is also found in their evaluative response to native varieties of English. Although
previous studies have revealed that Japanese users appear to endorse a native variety, in
particular American English, Cargile et al.s (2006) research showed that their judgment is
based on their stereotype of NSs mediated through education and exposure to media such
as American TV dramas and movies. The Japanese college students in their study evaluated
African-American vernacular English less favorably than mainstream US English. These
studies indicate that learners language attitudes are inseparable from affect (i.e. emotional
reactions), and social cognition (ideologies and beliefs in a community) (Garrett et al.
2003; McKenzie 2008a).2
Research question
As indicated in the aforementioned previous studies, Japanese students tend to devalue
Japanese-accented English as well as other non-native English varieties. The present study
explores this tendency by comparing the evaluative reactions of Japanese students to their
own English with those of other Asian groups (Korean and Malaysian), in order to see
whether the negativity against their English variant is observed only in Japanese learners
or is a general tendency among English users in Asia. Another motivation is that there are
attitudinal studies with other non-native groups, including Malaysian, reporting similar
results (Crismore et al. 1996), yet among them the measurement and research materials
are inconsistent, so that it is difficult to come to a cohesive conclusion through mere
comparison of individual results. The present study, then, was designed to answer the
following research question:
What are the attitudes of Japanese, Korean, and Malaysian learners toward the pronuncia-
tion of their English variants?
METHOD
Participants
A total of 128 university students from Japan, South Korea, and Malaysia participated
in the study. The Japanese participants included 50 English majors who had enrolled in
the first introductory linguistics course at the University of the Ryukyus, Japan at the time
of the research, and the majority of them were in their first-year, ranging in age from 18 to
23. The other two Asian groups, Korean and Malaysian, consisted of 46 participants from
Keimyung University in South Korea and 32 from Universiti Malaysia Sabah, respectively.
All of these students, except for one Malaysian student, were majoring in English. Unlike
the Japanese participants, students in these groups varied greatly in academic year and age:
the Korean group included 29 sophomores, 10 juniors, and 7 seniors, with ages ranging
from 19 to 40; the Malaysian group included 1 freshman, 12 sophomores, 8 juniors,
10 seniors, and 1 unspecified, with ages ranging from 20 to 50. Moreover, due to their
multicultural and multilingual society, the Malaysian students L1s were not identical:
while most of the Malaysians had either Malay or Chinese as their L1, some mentioned
other languages, including Melayu Brunei, Iban, and Kadazandusun.

Data collection, instrument, and procedure

Language attitude, which is considered to be latent, has been traditionally assessed
by the participants evaluative response to accent heard in different varieties of English,
namely, participants are asked to judge them based on terms such as intelligibility, endorse-
ment, competence, and social attractiveness (Cargile et al. 2006; Jenkins 2007; McKenzie
2008a). The present study adopted a 12-item questionnaire designed to explore Asian
students self-assessment of their own English. The items attempted to measure tripar-
tite components constructing learners attitudes (Bohner and Wanke 2002; Garett et al.
2003), which included a cognitive component (e.g. beliefs about the world); an affec-
tive component (e.g. feelings about a target language and a group of its native speak-
ers); and a behavioral component (e.g. approaching or avoiding a certain ethnic group).
The participants were requested to respond to 12 statements on a 6-point scale (1 =
strongly disagree; 2 = disagree; 3 = moderately disagree; 4 = moderately agree; 5 = agree;
6 = strongly agree) based on their own pronunciation as shown in the Appendix. Then,
they were asked to suggest a variety of English accent which they considered to be a
criterion when judging whether a speaker is native or not. Finally, they were asked to
indicate what they believed to be of more importance in speaking English, native-like
pronunciation or message conveyance, justified by providing their reasoning. Message
conveyance means that a speaker uses any resources available including linguistic devices
to aid the interlocutor(s) in understanding his or her intention when producing an utter-
ance. The whole questionnaire was written in English, and the survey was conducted in
each country between October and November, 2008. The researchers administered the
questionnaire in class with the Japanese participants, and a university faculty member
conducted the survey with his or her group in the other two countries. One-way analysis
of variance (ANOVA) and percentages were used to compare accent perception among the
three groups.
RESULTS
Cognitive constituent of attitudes toward the participants own variety
Out of the 12 statements, items 3, 6, 7, 10, 11, and 12, which were cate-
gorized as cognitive aspect, were further divided into three subcategories: accent-
edness (item 3), intelligibility (items 6 and 7), and acceptability (items 10, 11,
and 12).
In order to clarify how the three groups of participants perceived their own accents
in terms of the NS vs. NNS dichotomy, their ratings for item 3 were analyzed.3 As
Table 1 shows, the Japanese participants recognized and believed in their non-nativeness in
English pronunciation more than the other participant groups (p < 0.01): mean difference =
0.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.35, 1.48 for comparison with the Koreans; mean
difference = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.16, 1.41 with the Malaysians. Substantial effect sizes also
support the negative ratings of the Japanese group (d = 0.82 and 0.65, respectively).4 On
the other hand, neither the Tukey post hoc test nor effect size distinguished the Koreans
and Malaysians (mean difference = 0.13, 95% CI = 0.77, 0.50, p > 0.05, with
d = 0.11).
Following the accentedness judgment, the participants evaluations of the intelligibility
and acceptability of their own English were examined. The definition of intelligibility in the

Table 1. Descriptive statistics, results of ANOVA, and post hoc Tukey procedures, and effect sizes for
accentedness judgment: item 3 (N = 128)
Location of significance:
Mean (standard deviation) ANOVA Tukey p (effect sizes)
Item J (N = 50) K (N = 46) M (N = 32) F(2, 125) p J-K J-M K-M
3. I have a non-native 4.72 3.80 3.94 8.47 0.000 0.001 0.010 0.087
accent. (1.11) (1.13) (1.30) (0.82) (0.65) (0.11)
p < .01
Note: J = Japanese, K = Korean, M = Malaysian.
intelligibility judgment: items 6 and 7 (N = 128)
6. NSs can easily 2.74 3.83 4.59 35.76 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.003
understand my (1.05) (1.02) (0.88) (1.05) (1.91) (0.80)
accented English.
7. NNSs can easily 3.74 4.07 4.97 15.03 0.000 0.254 0.000 0.000
understand my (1.07) (1.12) (0.65) (0.30) (1.39) (0.98)
accented English.
p < 0.01
current study follows Smiths (1992) definition. He divides complex language processing
into three stages: intelligibility (i.e. recognizing and decomposing phonological sequences
as a word in the utterance); comprehensibility (i.e. identifying words and sentences); and
interpretability (i.e. knowing the literal meaning, and figuring out a speakers intended
meaning). In EIL situations in which various types of English are used with unique
phonological characteristics, comprehension difficulties are most likely to be caused at the
phonological level. In this sense, we assumed that participants interpretation of the phrase
to understand my accented English in items 6 and 7 should have included the phonological
identification in connected speech, such as for the initial step in processing superordinate
linguistic components (i.e. words, sentences, and discourse), in oral communication, and
this reading should allow a user to accommodate other possible ones (i.e. comprehensibility
and interpretability).
In Table 2, the Japanese participants anxiety for the intelligibility of their own English
is indicated in the low mean scores for both item 6 (M = 2.74) and item 7 (M = 3.74). In
particular, the Tukey post hoc test revealed that their rating was the lowest among the groups
for the former item (p < 0.01): mean difference = 1.09, 95% CI = 1.57, 0.60 between
the Japanese and Koreans; mean difference = 1.85, 95% CI = 2.39, 1.32 between the
Japanese and Malaysians; mean difference = 0.77, 95% CI = 1.31, 0.22 between the
Koreans and Malaysians. These results clarified a hierarchy of the three groups in terms
of perceived intelligibility to NSs, in which the Japanese were the lowest, followed by the

Figure 1. Percentages for item 7: Non-native speakers can easily understand my accented English
Koreans, and the Malaysians the highest. Large effect sizes also supported the significant
differences (d = 0.80 and above for each comparison).
Compared with the results of item 6, Japanese students felt that their English was
intelligible when speaking to NNSs to the same degree as the Koreans (mean difference =
0.33, 95% CI = 0.81, 0.16, p > 0.05), yet the former group indicated reservations
realized in the response distribution pattern as shown in Figure 1. The total percentage
of positive responses was 66 per cent, whereas it was 73.9 per cent in the Korean group
and 84.9 per cent in the Malaysian group. Indeed, the d score indicated a small effect for
nationalities between the Japanese and Koreans (0.30). That is, regardless of whether the
counterpart is an NS or NNS, the Japanese students are more apt to be dismissive of the
intelligibility of their own accented English. The Malaysians, by contrast, had the most
confidence among the three Asian groups, followed by the Koreans (mean difference =
1.23, 95% CI = 3.07, 1.72, p < 0.01, with d = 1.39 between the Japanese and
Malaysian groups for Item 7; mean difference = 0.90, 95% CI = 1.45, 0.36, p < 0.01,
with d = 0.98 between the Korean and Malaysian groups for item 7).
The degree of acceptability of a particular variant may vary depending upon the context
in which English is used. Considering this assumption, the degree of acceptability was
explored in three different contexts: international business, English teaching, and personal
cross-cultural communication.
As Table 3 shows, the mean scores on the acceptability ratings also demonstrate the
Japanese students negative perception: M = 2.58 for acceptability in international business,
M = 3.20 for English teaching, and M = 3.86 for personal cross-cultural communication.
Their estimation of acceptability in international business was the lowest among the three
groups, with significant effect sizes: mean difference = 0.68, 95% CI = 1.25, 0.11,
p < 0.05, with d = 0.56 for comparison with the Koreans; mean difference = 1.83, 95%
CI = 2.46, 1.19, p < 0.01, with d = 1.62, with the Malaysians. The Korean group
followed the Japanese and was more negative than the Malaysians (mean difference =
1.15, 95% CI = 1.79, 0.50, p < 0.01, with d = 1.00), which again made clear the

acceptability judgment: items 10, 11, and 12 (N = 128)
Location of
significance:
10. My pronunciation 2.58 3.26 4.41 23.28 0.000 0.015 0.000 0.000
would be acceptable in (1.21) (1.24) (1.04) (0.56) (1.62) (1.00)
international business.
would be acceptable for (1.26) (1.24) (0.82) (0.32) (2.01) (1.61)
an English teacher.
would be acceptable in (1.20) (1.05) (0.73) (0.51) (1.24) (0.75)
personal cross-cultural
communication.
p < 0.01
Note: J = Japanese, K = Korean, M = Malaysian..
relationship of the three Asian groups: Japanese < Koreans < Malaysians. The Japanese
students might strongly believe that their Japanese English would not be capable of func-
tioning in the international business context, which is partly shared by the Koreans, while
the Malaysians seemed sure that their own variety of English would be acceptable.
For an English teacher, the Japanese and Korean groups gave a lower estimate than
the Malaysian group: mean difference = 1.71, 95% CI = 2.33, 1.08, p < 0.01,
with d = 2.01 between the Japanese and Malaysians; mean difference = 2.10, 95%
CI = 2.73, 0.1.47, p < 0.01, with d = 1.61 between the Koreans and Malaysians. The
Malaysians favorably believed that their Malaysian-accented English would be acceptable
in a pedagogical situation, whereas the other two groups shared a negative view toward
their English pronunciation (mean difference = 0.40, 95% CI = 0.17, 0.96, p > 0.05,
with d = 0.32). In fact, the positive estimation of the Malaysian participants replicated the
report by Gill (2002; cited in Pillay 2004): 79.2 per cent of the participants in her study
considered the educated Malaysian variety suitable as a model of English in response to a
questionnaire item, as compared with British English.
In the context of personal cross-cultural communication, on the other hand, higher mean
scores were obtained from each group. While the mean is moderate for the Japanese group
(M = 3.86), 66 per cent of them indicated that their English pronunciation was acceptable,
as shown in Figure 2. This higher percentage indicates that an informal or casual context
could relax the Japanese students, freeing them from being concerned about speaking the
correct variety of English. It should be noted, however, that when compared with the other
two groups they were again the most negative toward their English pronunciation, followed
by the Koreans, while the Malaysians were the most positive: mean difference = 0.57,
95% CI = 1.08, 0.07, p < 0.05, with d = 0.51 between the Japanese and Koreans; mean
difference = 1.23, 95% CI = 1.79, 0.67, p < 0.01, with d = 1.24 between the Japanese
and Malaysians; mean difference = 0.66, 95% CI = 1.23, 0.09, p < 0.05, with d =
0.75 between the Koreans and Malaysians.

Figure 2. Percentages for item 12: My pronunciation would be acceptable in personal cross-cultural
communication
Affect for the participants own variety of English

Through items 1 and 4, participants were requested to judge whether they were affectively
attached to their own English pronunciation. Table 4 reveals the Malaysian students higher
degree of confidence in their own English variety than the other two groups (p < 0.01):
mean difference = 1.91, 95% CI = 1.31, 2.51 for comparison with the Japanese; mean
difference = 1.03, 95% CI = 0.42, 1.64 with the Koreans. For item 4, the Malaysians were
also the most satisfied with their own accent (p < 0.01): mean difference = 2.08, 95%
CI = 1.45, 2.70 when compared with the Japanese; mean difference = 1.42, 95% CI = 0.78,
2.95 with the Koreans. Large effect sizes for these comparisons (d > 0.80) also supported
the distinctive judgment of the Malaysians.
The Korean students followed the Malaysians, but they displayed a reluctance to endorse
their own English pronunciation, with relatively low mean scores (M = 3.22 for item 1 and
M = 3.02 for item 4). However, the Japanese groups ratings in both items were far below
affective judgment: items 1 and 4 (N = 128)
1. I am confident in my 2.34 3.22 4.25 28.90 0.000 0.001 0.000 0.003
English pronunciation. (1.24) (1.11) (0.88) (0.75) (1.78) (1.03)
4. I am happy with my 2.36 3.02 4.44 31.13 0.000 0.017 0.000 0.000
accent. (1.26) (1.00) (1.24) (0.58) (1.66) (1.26)
p < 0.01

the Koreans (p < 0.01) with medium effect sizes, demonstrating again their extremely
negative perceptions of their own Japanese-accented English: mean difference = 0.88,
95% CI = 1.41, 0.33, with d = 0.75 for Item 1; mean difference = 0.66, 95% CI =
1.23, 0.10, with d = 0.75 for Item 4.
Behavioral judgment of the participants own variant

Items 2, 5, 8, and 9 attempted to uncover the participants behavioral intentions with
regard to speaking English. As shown in Table 5, the three groups disagreed that they spoke
with a native accent (item 2), while the Tukey post hoc test found that more Malaysians
positively responded than the others: mean difference = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.27, 1.40,
p < 0.01 for comparison with the Japanese; mean difference = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.26,
1.40, p < 0.01 with the Koreans. The effect sizes for each of these comparisons were also
large (d = 0.78 and d = 0.80 respectively). The Japanese and Korean groups were identical
in their rating results (mean difference = 0.00, 95% CI = 0.51, 0.51, p > 0.05, with
d = 0.00).
For item 5, which asked the participants if they hesitated to show their own accent,
no statistical significance among the groups was found at a significance level of 0.05
through ANOVA (F(2, 125) = 2.99) or Tukey (mean difference = 0.04, 95% CI = 0.64,
0.72 between the Japanese and Koreans; mean difference = 0.72, 95% CI = 0.03, 1.47
between the Japanese and Malaysians; mean difference = 0.68, 95% CI = 0.09, 1.44
between the Koreans and Malaysians). The participants reserved clarification of their
responses to this item with similarly moderate mean scores, but medium effect sizes found
between the Malaysians and the Japanese (d = 0.51) and between the Malaysians and the
Koreans (d = 0.52) might indicate that the Malaysians showed less hesitation in showing
their Malaysian accent than the others.
Unlike the items above, the responses to items 8 and 9 showed a clearer difference among
the groups. With regard to item 8, the Malaysian students indicated a desire to maintain
their own accent. The mean score (M = 4.44) was significantly higher than the other two
behavioral judgment: items 2, 5, 8, and 9 (N = 128)
Mean (Standard Deviation) ANOVA Tukey p (effect sizes)
2. I speak English 2.26 2.26 3.09 7.48 0.000 1.000 0.002 0.002
with a native-like (1.08) (1.02) (1.06) (0.00) (0.78) (0.80)
accent.
5. I hesitate to show 3.78 3.74 3.06 2.99 0.054 0.989 0.065 0.094
my accent. (1.54) (1.32) (1.27) (0.03) (0.51) (0.52)
8. I would like to keep 2.04 2.67 4.44 36.27 0.000 0.040 0.000 0.000
my accent. (1.18) (1.33) (1.27) (0.50) (1.96) (1.36)
9. I would like to 5.46 5.57 4.56 10.69 0.000 0.867 0.000 0.000
sound like a native (0.95) (0.94) (1.19) (0.12) (0.84) (0.94)
speaker of English.
p < 0.01

Table 6. Percentages of priority in speaking English (N = 128)

J (N = 50) K (N = 46) M (n N = 32)
Native-likeness 68.0% (34) 58.7% (27) 16.0% (5)

Message conveyance 32.0% (16) 41.3% (19) 84.0% (27)
Note: The numbers in parentheses indicate the actual number of participants.
groups (M = 2.04 for the Japanese and M = 2.67 for the Koreans): mean difference = 2.40,
95% CI = 1.72, 3.07, p < 0.01 for comparison with the Japanese; mean difference = 1.76,
95% CI = 1.08, 2.45, p < 0.01 with the Koreans. The d scores for both pairings were very
large (1.96 and 1.36, respectively). Although the Japanese and Korean groups exhibited
low motivation to keep their accent, it is notable that the Japanese students demonstrated
greater rejection than the Koreans, with a statistical difference and medium effect size
(mean difference = 0.63, 95% CI = 1.24, 0.02, p < 0.05, with d = 0.50).
As for item 9, although the Malaysian groups displayed a desire to approximate an
NS accent, their ratings were significantly lower than the other two groups (M = 4.56
for the Malaysians, M = 5.46 for the Japanese, and M = 5.57 for the Koreans). The
Tukey test identified a significant difference from the Japanese (mean difference = 0.90,
95% CI = 1.44, 0.35, p < 0.01) and from the Koreans (mean difference = 1.00, 95%
CI = 1.55, 0.45, p < 0.01). High d scores were also obtained for both pairings (i.e. above
0.80). In contrast to the Malaysians, both the Japanese and Korean groups demonstrated
their prejudice against their own accent, with the same degree of ambition to attain an
NS model. No significant difference was found between the Japanese and Korean groups
(mean difference = 0.11, 95% CI = 0.59, 0.38, p > 0.05), with a negligible effect size
(d = 0.12).
The results shown in Table 5 indicate that both Japanese and Korean learners are
anxious about pursuing NS pronunciation. Their attitude is reflected in the results of the
participants priority when speaking English. As can be seen in Table 6, the Japanese group
emphasized native-likeness rather than message conveyance, as did the Koreans, whereas
the reverse tendency was realized in the Malaysian participants responses.
The majority of the Japanese students justified the native-likeness priority with the
reasoning that speaking like a NS could make them easily understood. They seemed to
believe that native-like pronunciation is essential in order to ensure that counterpart(s)
recognize phonological segments in a sequential sound stream in an utterance. Some of
them even prioritized being native-like because native English is correct and perfect.
Similarly, over 50 per cent of the Korean students also admitted that native-like pro-
nunciation was their priority. The major reasoning is that their Korean-accented English
may hinder easy and smooth communication in English. On the other hand, those who
put a priority on message conveyance reasoned that a speaker should make a message
comprehensible by carefully choosing vocabulary and sentence structures.
Unlike the other Asian groups, Malaysian students displayed much less desire to approx-
imate a NS: 27 out of 32 Malaysian students regarded comprehension as more important
than having native-like pronunciation in speaking English. The majority pointed out that
successful message conveyance is the ultimate goal of communication, no matter what
their accent. Some students commented that a native accent would not necessarily be

intelligible to every English speaker, and others mentioned that they did not need to have
a native-like accent because they were not NSs of English. One student commented that
she was proud of her Malaysian-accented English.
Finally, it should be pointed out that significant differences in mean scores were found
between the Japanese and Korean EFL participants. The Japanese students scored signif-
icantly lower than the Koreans on item 1, I am confident in my English pronunciation;
item 4, I am happy with my accent; item 6, Native speakers can easily understand my
accented English; item 8, I would like to keep my accent; item 10, My pronunciation
would be acceptable in international business; and item 12, My pronunciation would be
acceptable in personal cross-cultural communication. In addition to mean scores, their
response distribution patterns in percentages were distinctive for these items as well as
item 7 Non-native speakers can easily understand my accented English. These results
indicate that the Korean participants appeared to be more positive about their variety of
English than the Japanese. They value their own Korean-accented English as a functional
tool of communication to some degree, even though they have native-oriented attitudes.
The discrepancy between the Japanese and Korean groups suggests that the perception of
their accented English tends to vary even among countries where English is learned as a
foreign language. This point will be discussed further in the next section.
DISCUSSION
The present study has found that the three groups of Asian learners have distinct attitudes
toward their own English accents, as follow:
1. The Japanese group believed that their L1-accented English is not so intelligible to
other English users, to the extent that it might hinder smooth communication, and
that it lacked affective attachment to their own variety.
i. The Korean participants also negatively evaluated their Korean-accented English,
yet to lesser degree than the Japanese.
2. The Malaysians admired their own variety of English, and their adherence to NS
English was not as striking as with the other two Asian groups.
These results will be discussed considering contextual factors, including identity in lan-
guage learning.
Potential factors on attitudinal differences

The pedagogical context in the three countries possibly influences the participants
construction of their attitudes toward English, that is, whether English is viewed as a
foreign language or a second language in the society. In both Japan and South Korea,
English is a required subject at school and is taught as a foreign language: from junior
high school to university and starting in 2011 at elementary schools nationwide in Japan,
and from the third year of elementary school up to high school and most universities
in South Korea. As English is recognized as a tool to strengthen national power in the
global society, the authorities in both countries now emphasize the development of English
communication abilities. In Japan, an Action Plan issued by the Ministry of Education,
Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) in 2003 clearly aims to cultivate Japanese
with a command of English as a common international language (MEXT 2003), and in

South Korea, spoken English is emphasized rather than grammatical knowledge (Honna
2006). In the EFL context, learners of English are assumed to have been exposed mainly
to the native variety of English through teaching materials and NS instructors, but they
have few opportunities to use English outside the classroom. Their limited exposure is
very likely to have created their biased view of English variants, and their insufficient
interaction in English might enhance the devaluation of their own varieties. In other words,
their judgment could be based not on their actual experience of successful or unsuccessful
communication in English but on their belief built upon language ideology in the society,
that is, since a native accent is the ideal model to follow, their accented English needs to
be corrected because it deviates from the native norm.
On the other hand, English is used as a second language in Malaysia, where there
is a linguistically and culturally pluralistic society consisting of Malays, Chinese, and
Indians. English was brought along with the British rulers, and under British administration
it acquired significant status as the official language and was used as the medium of
instruction for the elite. Then, the accessibility of English created economic inequality
among the citizens of Malaysia. The National Language Policy in 1967 finally removed
the official status of English and promoted the use of Malay in official settings, including
educational institutions, resulting in a decline of English usage and less competence in
English. With the recognition of English as a necessity for modernization and economic
success in the global world, the government has been challenged to develop and implement
a language policy to empower the nations English ability for successful achievement of
industrialization status by the year 2020, referred to as Vision 2020 (Gill 2005). They
prioritized English education at primary, secondary, and tertiary levels, and some private
higher education institutions have adopted English for instruction and have developed
exchange programs with overseas schools (Yamamoto and Kawahara 2007).
Although it has lost its position as the official language, English is deeply-rooted in
Malaysian society and recently has served as a lingua franca, especially in business (Nair-
Venugopal 2000; Kawahara 2007). Crismore et al. (1996) reported that the Malaysian
variety of English (i.e. Malaysian English) is regarded as functional enough to achieve
communication purposes and is still widely used in mainly informal situations by the
Malaysian people. Such a distinctive linguistic situation in Malaysia might enhance the
Malaysian students awareness of the functional value of their own Malaysian-accented
English, generating their lower adherence to native English varieties.
The educational situation of English could be one of the influential factors in explaining
distinctive attitudes among the three countries, yet there is a particular tendency realized
in Japan and South Korea, where English is dealt with as a foreign language: the Korean
group evaluated their own accented English less negatively compared to the Japanese.
This difference can be attributed to the English education policy and social movement in
South Korea. Analyzing English textbooks used in middle schools, Kawai (2004) reported
that one of the pedagogical goals in English education in South Korea is to improve
learners English ability to explain their native culture and customs to foreigners. Despite
the depiction of native English speakers cultures and customs in the textbooks, the dialogs
and reading passages center on Korean culture and people. In addition, first-year high
school students are required to take a compulsory English class one objective of which is
the improvement of the practical English skills necessary for correctly informing foreigners
about their own country. Based on his analysis, Kawai (2004) stated that the Korean
government considers understanding their own culture to be important in cross-cultural

communication and in attempting to develop students self-confidence and pride as citizens

with the use of positive content about Korean culture.
As for the current movement in the society, Korean English is used in English newspapers
issued in the country: Korean authors write articles in the unique variety of English in which
syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic uniqueness is transplanted from the Korean language
(Honna 2006). Kirkpatrick (2007) addresses the developmental cycle of new varieties
of English. Initially English is brought into a non-English-speaking country when it is
settled by the English-speaking incomers and, through frequent use of English among
native English-speaking and local people, eventually English becomes institutionalized as
a recognized variety of English functioning locally. Malaysia went through the process
described above via British administration, which created localized Malaysian English,
whereas neither Japan nor South Korea experienced this. However, Kirkpatrick speculates
that new varieties could be developed even in the Expanding Circles without experiencing
the initial stage. This developmental process is appearing in English-language journalism
in Korea, and eventually Korean English will be established as a recognized variety.
These pedagogical and social contexts reflect their language identity, in which the
history of each country has tremendous influence in separating Japanese participants from
the other two Asian groups. Language learning is not merely a process of acquiring new
linguistic forms and functions, but rather is a process influenced by many factors such
as power relations, language ideologies, and language policies. The external influence
restricts how learners relate themselves to a target language in the society, creating a new
identity as the L2 learner. The language identity issue is critical for nations that have
experienced threats to their language rights, for example, as a result of being colonized.
Historically, language choice and use were controlled by a social conflict or a foreign
power in Malaysia and South Korea: because it is a multilingual country, language choice
has been a political and controversial issue in the Malaysian society; in South Korea, under
Japanese rule between 1910 and 1945, education in Japanese marginalized the Koreans
as the Japanese suppressed the use of the native language. These historical facts have
promoted the language user identity, constructing their attitudes to the language brought
by the dominant nation and their own local languages. Thus, the current pedagogical and
social actions may not be divorced from the experience and sacrifice that each country has
been through in the past.
On the other hand, the majority of Japanese people appear to be less sensitive to
language identity than the other two Asian groups. Although the language rights of the
Ainu and Ryukyu languages have been argued for, there is no other nationality that insists
on linguistic and political autonomy in its own right in the country. Historically, Japan
has been seldom threatened in terms of language choice and use. According to Suzuki
(2006), the very limited experience with foreign powers might have eased the acceptability
of Westerners and their culture in Japan. Furthermore, Kubota (1998) points out that
the Japanese tend to evaluate their own and other cultures in comparison with Western
culture, and they simply classify them into either Western or Other (i.e. non-Western).
This alternative judgment can enhance their uncritical and unconscious favoritism for NS
English and devaluation of non-native varieties of English. Under these circumstances, it
is difficult for the Japanese to see a link between language and the identity reflected in
its variation and function. While learning English, they identify themselves as a learner
or an NNS of English, but not as an English user with a unique variant, believing that
communication in the international setting is impossible unless they fix their incorrect

accent to approximate to the NS accent since their accent may not be intelligible to other
English users otherwise.
Implications for English education in Japan

Based on findings in previous motivational studies (e.g. Yashima 2000), Japanese EFL
learners are aware that English is used as a means to interact with people from various ethnic
backgrounds in international communication; that is, they are not necessarily motivated to
learn English because they are interested in a NS group and their culture. In contrast, the
attitudinal studies, including the present research, have reported Japanese EFL learners
desire to achieve NS norms.
In order to free the Japanese from the constraint on their own accented variant, ELT
plays an essential role in discouraging their biased perception of non-native English and
cultivating their communication flexibility to accommodate the accent diversity. As for the
initial step of setting pedagogical goals to achieve, the term EIL should be interpreted for
Japanese EFL learners. Besides insufficient experience of interaction with English users
other than their own Japanese or native teachers of English in the classroom, a lack of
concrete definition of EIL may give the Japanese difficulties in conceptualizing it and lead
them to pursue a native variety, which is only available in their learning context. Given
this argument, as pointed out in Honna (2008), it must be emphasized that EIL does not
mean a wide spread of native variety of English, but rather it reflects the cultural diversity
of users with distinctive cultural backgrounds. Along with the notion of the multicultural
aspects of English, it is critical to realize that all varieties of English have accents, as stated
in Honna (2008: 6):
The fact is that English is becoming a conspicuously diverse language. Everyone speaks English with
an accent. As Americans speak American English and Britons British English, Asians, Europeans,
Africans, and South Americans speak English with their own national or cultural characteristics. The
internationalization of English has caused the diversification of English.
Following this explanation of EIL, the acquisition of native English as the pedagogical
goal is not suitable anymore to promote the concept of EIL; regarding norms of accent,
the linguistic core features that do not hinder mutual understanding in communication can
be introduced into the classroom (Jenkins 2000).5
The successful promotion of the EIL among learners depends on whether Japanese
teachers of English (JTEs) are able to perceive non-native varieties of English as unique,
not as discriminatory measures, and accept them as individual varieties of EIL. Despite
increasing awareness of EIL and attention given to the necessity of teaching its concepts,
the practice is not fully realized in teacher training programs in Japan. Matsuda (2009),
investigating how the perspectives of EIL are incorporated into pre-service teacher training
programs offered at universities, found that although teacher trainers were aware of the
importance and necessity of introducing the linguistic and functional diversity of English,
they claimed that it was not necessary to offer a specific course focusing on the topic.
The concept of EIL is brought in as part of several teacher training courses. Matsuda,
however, claims that the mere exposure to various Englishes is not enough to change the
attitudes toward and beliefs about English that JTEs have; rather, individual courses should
be designed to help them understand and accept English as a diverse language. To the best

of our knowledge, Honna (2008) is the only study to report on the workshops of Japanese
EFL teachers highlighting the reality of English in multinational communication situations
through self-expressive activities. According to him, after the sessions, the participants
developed positive attitudes toward non-native varieties and became aware that Japanese
English is intelligible and should be accepted.
CONCLUSION
The current study has examined, through self-assessment, the attitudes of English learn-
ers from three Asian countries (Japan, South Korea, and Malaysia), toward their own
variants of English. The results suggest that their responses depend on the educational
goals and particular social environment of each country. In the EFL situation, although
both Japanese and Korean participants showed high endorsement for native English speak-
ers, the former is prejudiced against their own variety of English, so-called Japanese
English, whereas the latter consider their pronunciation intelligible to some extent. On the
other hand, the Malaysian students who have been exposed to Malaysian English as well as
the native variety of English in their society have confidence in their own variety, reflecting
their L1 phonological characteristics. Overall, compared with the other two Asian coun-
tries, related factors, including educational and sociocultural, might not be forceful enough
yet to promote a localized variety of English (i.e. Japanese English), among the Japanese.
Admitting that the interfering effects of the Japanese accent on listeners comprehension
should be taken seriously and need further investigation, it is pedagogically necessary to
provide language instruction that makes Japanese EFL learners aware of the value of dif-
ferent varieties of English, including their own, from the pluralistic view of English. More
importantly, however, teacher training should put a priority on changing the stereotypical
assumptions about English that the majority of JTEs may hold. Jenkins (2007) reported
that teachers of English from Expanding Circle countries still believe that proper English
belongs to NS countries such as the UK and US despite a diversity of English and its users.
Jenkins urges us to provide courses designed in both pre- and in-service teacher training
programs to practice the EIL concept, which should help teachers of English create some
classroom activities to promote their students language awareness.
Finally, one may claim that the results are not conclusive enough to generalize the
distinctive attitudes that each group holds due to a small sample size. Admitting the
limitation, however, the findings should be valid since the present study administered the
survey on different ethnic groups with an identical questionnaire rather than comparing
those from various studies conducted with different research methods.
APPENDIX: QUESTIONNAIRE ITEMS
(1) I am confident in my English pronunciation.

(2) I speak English with a native-like accent.
(3) I have a non-native accent.
(4) I am happy with my accent.
(5) I hesitate to show my accent.
(6) Native speakers of English can easily understand my accented English.
(7) Non-native speakers of English can easily understand my accented English.
(8) I would like to keep my accent.

(9) I would like to sound like a native speaker of English.

(10) My pronunciation would be acceptable in international business.
(11) My pronunciation would be acceptable for an English teacher.
(12) My pronunciation would be acceptable in personal cross-cultural communication.
NOTES
1. The theoretical and empirical validity of the dichotomy between NS and NNS has been argued in previous studies
(e.g. Widdowson 1994; Jenkins 2000; McKay 2002; Kachru 2005), pointing out the superordinate and subordinate
relationship between the two groups. Some alternatives have been proposed. For instance, Jenkins (2000) suggested
labels such as monolingual English speaker (MLS), bilingual English speaker (BES), and non-bilingual English
speaker (NBES). Kachru (2005) has proposed a distinction between genetic nativeness and functional nativeness in
the use of English.
2. In the current paper, stereotype refers to oversimplified or fixed categorization in which individuals are classified into
certain groups on the basis that they share certain features such as physical appearance and behavioral dispositions;
ideology is a socio-political concept which classifies the world based on assumptions and values shared by every
member of a community; and belief is equal to a particular opinion about what is true or correct, most of the
time without proof. All of them might be developed through the experiences one faces in life and construct ones
relationship to society.
3. A native variety of English that participants referred to as a criterion to discriminate native and non-native accents is
revealed as follows: 72.0 per cent of Japanese (36 out of 50) and 84.8 per cent of Koreans (39 out of 46) based on the
American accent, and 87.5 per cent of Malaysians (28 out of 32) referred to the British accent.
4. The present study adopted the formula shown in Larson-Hall (2010: 285) to calculate effect sizes of the differ-
ence in participants nationalities on their rating results. The calculation was conducted with an online calculator at
http://web.uccs.edu/lbecker/Psy590/escalc3.htm, which was provided in Larson-Hall (2010). Effect sizes were pre-
sented with Cohens d, interpreting sizes larger than 0.80 as large, sizes between 0.50 and 0.80 as medium, sizes
between 0.20 and 0.50 as small, and sizes smaller than 0.20 as negligible. This interpretation followed Cohen (1992)
and Norris and Ortega (2000).
5. As pointed out in Modiano (2001), a descriptive model of EIL needs to be codified, legitimized, and standardized
urgently since educational prescriptive norms of EIL are not fully available yet.
REFERENCES
Bohner, Gerd, and Wanke, Michaela (2002) Attitudes and Attitude Change. Hove: Psychology Press.
Cargile, Aaron, C., Takai, Jiro, and Rodrguez, Jose, I. (2006) Attitudes toward African-American vernacular English: A
US export to Japan? Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 27, 44356.
Chiba, Reiko, Matsuura, Hiroko, and Yamamoto, Asako (1995) Japanese attitudes toward English accents. World Englishes
14, 7786.
Cohen, Jacob (1992) A power primer. Quantitative Methods in Psychology 112, 15559.
Crismore, Avon, Ngeow, Karen Y., and Soo, Keng-Soon (1996) Attitudes toward English in Malaysia. World Englishes
15, 31935.
Fraser, Sue (2006) Perceptions of varieties of spoken English: implications for EIL. In Richard Kiely, Pauline Red-
Dickins, Helen Woodfield, and Gerald Clibbon (eds.), Language, Culture, and Identity in Applied Linguistics
(pp. 7997). London: British Association for Applied Linguistics in association with Equinox.
Garrett, Peter, Coupland, Nikolas, and Williams, Angie (2003) Investigating Language Attitudes: Social Meanings of
Dialect, Ethnicity and Performance. Cardiff: University of Wales Press.
Gill, Saran Kaur (2005) Language policy in Malaysia: Reversing direction. Language Policy 4, 24160.
Honna, Nobuyuki (2006) East Asian Englishes. In Braj B. Kachru, Yamuna Kachru, and Cecil L. Nelson (eds.), The
Handbook of World Englishes (pp. 11429). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Honna, Nobuyuki (2008) English as a Multicultural Language in Asian Contexts: Issues and Ideas. Tokyo: Kuroshio
Publishers.
Jenkins, Jennifer (2000) The Phonology of English as an International Language: New Models, New Norms, New Goals.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Jenkins, Jennifer (2007) English as a Lingua Franca: Attitude and Identity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kachru, Braj B. (2005) Asian Englishes: Beyond the Canon. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
Kawahara, Toshiaki (2007) Tagengo kokka Mare-shia no gengo seisaku (Language policy in the multilingual nation,
Malaysia). In Tadayuki Yamamoto and Toshiaki Kawahara (eds.), Sekai no Gengo Seisaku Dai Ni Shu: Tagengo Shakai
ni Sonaete (The Language Policy in the World) (pp. 10934). Tokyo: Kuroshio Shuppan.

Kawai, Tadahito (2004) Kankoku no Eigo Kyoiku Seisaku: Nihon no Eigo Kyoiku Seisaku no Mondaiten o Saguru (The
Policy of English Education in Korea: Exploring the Problems in the Policy of English Education in Japan). Osaka:
Kansai Daigaku Shuppanbu.
Kirkpatick, Andy (2007) World Englishes: Implications for International Communication and English Language Teach-
ing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kubota, Ryuko (1998) Ideologies of English in Japan. World Englishes 17, 295306.
Larson-Hall, Jenifer (2010) A Guide to Doing Statistics in Second Language Research Using SPSS. New York: Routledge.
Matsuda, Aya (2003) The ownership of English in Japanese secondary schools. World Englishes 22, 48396.
Matsuda, Aya (2009) Desirable but not necessary? The place of world Englishes and English as an international language
in English teacher preparation programs in Japan. In Farzad Sharifian (ed.), English as an International Language:
Perspectives and Pedagogical Issues (pp. 16989). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
McKay, Sandra L. (2002) Teaching English as an International Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
McKenzie, Robert (2008a) Social factors and non-native attitudes towards varieties of spoken English: a Japanese case
study. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 18, 6388.
McKenzie, Robert (2008b) The role of variety recognition in Japanese university students attitudes towards English
speech varieties. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 29, 13953.
MEXT (The Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology) (2003) Action plan to cultivate Japanese
with English Abilities. Retrieved 25 January, 2009, from http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/houdou/15/03/030318a.htm
Modiano, Mark (2001) Ideology and the ELT practitioner. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 11, 15973.
Nair-Venugopal, Shanta (2000) English, identity and the Malaysian workplace. World Englishes 19, 20513.
Norris, John M., and Ortega, Lourdes (2000) Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative
meta-analysis. Language Learning 50, 417528.
Pillay, Hannah (2004) Muddied waters: The issue of models of English for Malaysian schools. Retrieved 14 September,
2009, from English Language Teaching Center, Malaysia Web site: http://www.eltcm.org/eltc/resource_pabank.asp
Smith, Larry (1992) Spread of English and issues of intelligibility. In Braj B. Kachru (ed.), The Other Tongue: English
across Cultures (pp. 7590). Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
Suzuki, Takao (2006) Nihonjin wa Naze Nihon o Aisenaika? (Why Cant the Japanese Love Japan?). Tokyo: Shinchosha.
Timmis, Ivor (2002) Native-speaker norms and international English: a classroom view. ELT Journal 56, 24049.
Widdowson, Henry G. (1994). The ownership of English. TESOL Quarterly 28, 37789.
Yamamoto, Tadayuki and Kawahara, Toshiaki (2007) Sekai no Gengo Seisaku Dai 2 shuu: Tagengo Shakai ni Sonaete
(Language Policy in the World Vol 2: Preparing for a Multilingual Society). Tokyo: Kuroshio Publishers.
Yashima, Tomoko (2000) Orientations and motivation in foreign language learning: A study of Japanese college students.
JACET Bulletin 31, 12133.
(Received 4 December 2009.)


TE10003 Article 5

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

TE10003 Article 5

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

World Englishes, Vol. 30, No. 3, pp. 392408, 2011.

Asian varieties of English: Attitudes towards pronunciation

MINA TOKUMOTO AND MIKI SHIBATA

Attitudinal studies of Japanese EFL learners

Data collection, instrument, and procedure

Affect for the participants own variety of English

Behavioral judgment of the participants own variant

Table 6. Percentages of priority in speaking English (N = 128)

Native-likeness 68.0% (34) 58.7% (27) 16.0% (5)

Note: The numbers in parentheses indicate the actual number of participants.

Potential factors on attitudinal differences

communication and in attempting to develop students self-confidence and pride as citizens

Implications for English education in Japan

APPENDIX: QUESTIONNAIRE ITEMS

(1) I am confident in my English pronunciation.

(9) I would like to sound like a native speaker of English.

Вам также может понравиться