Attitude in language research

The attitudes of Slavic speakers towards English accents have been under-researched. The only language and accent attitude research in the Slavic context with the involvement of Polish speakers was conducted by Jenkins in her questionnaire study (Jenkins, Reference Jenkins2007). The study, whose interest lay in assessing native and non-native English accents, showed a strong attachment of non-native speakers toward native varieties and accents of English, although non-native speakers mostly used English for communication with other non-native speakers of English.

This paper considers attitudes of Slavic speakers toward English(es) used in intercultural settings, examining (i) benchmarks on learning English, (ii) the perception of native and non-native English accents, (iii) the attitude toward English as a Lingua Franca (ELF), and (iv) advantages and disadvantages of ELF communication. The term English as a Lingua Franca refers to the function of English when it is used for communication between speakers who speak the same or different first languages and choose English for a particular reason. This paper aims to contribute to existing research on language and accent attitudes by presenting a study from a folk linguistic perspective.

In recent accounts of social psychology, attitude is defined as ‘a psychological tendency that is expressed by evaluating a particular entity with some degree of favour or disfavour’ (Eagly & Chaiken, Reference Eagly, Chaiken, Albarracín, Johnson and Zanna2005: 166). With a global spread of English, and a growing number of non-native speakers of English, it has become interesting to learn how native speakers of English evaluate English(es) spoken by non-native speakers, and how they perceive and assess non-native speakers that use ‘their’ English (Kohn, Reference Kohn, De Houwer and Wilton2011: 81) in different communicative encounters. Early studies applying the folk linguistics research tradition focused native-speaker assessment and perception of native and non-native speaker English (Preston, Reference Preston, Chambers, Trudgill and Schilling2002; Lindemann, Reference Lindemann2005). Lindemann, for example, observes that mass media and television in the USA have greatly affected the formation of stereotypes and a negative attitude toward ‘foreign’. With a shift in focus from a predominantly native-speaker role in evaluations, it has become interesting to learn what non-native speakers in the expanding circle say about native and non-native varieties of English. In various regional contexts, studies have examined the attitudes of non-native speakers toward Standard English and various non-native English varieties (Friedrich, Reference Friedrich2000; Timmis, Reference Timmis2002; Matsuda, Reference Matsuda2003; Hahn, Reference Hahn2004; Field, Reference Field2005; Munro & Derwing, Reference Munro and Derwing2006; Case & Hu, Reference Case and Hu2010). The study by Friedrich looked at the attitude of Brazilian speakers of English toward English, and showed that British and American English varieties were seen as more prestigious than other native and non-native varieties. Although many studies revealed positive attitude toward non-native Englishes (Shim, 2002; Timmis, Reference Timmis2002; Matsuda, Reference Matsuda2003), none of the non-native speakers wanted to have a non-native speaker of English as their English teacher. In the European context, a large-scale variety and accent attitude study conducted by Jenkins revealed that respondents, most of whom were teachers of English, preferred American and British English, valuing the ‘correctness’ and ‘intelligibility’ of these varieties (Jenkins, Reference Jenkins2007: 186).

The present study draws on spontaneous and introspective spoken data elicited from video interviews with Slavic speakers of English. Semi-structured video interviews with fifteen users of English, whose first languages were Russian, Ukrainian, Polish and Slovak, were conducted at the University of Tübingen, Germany, and at the Independent Centre for Foreign Languages, Chernivtsi, Ukraine (Salakhyan Reference Salakhyan2012, Reference Salakhyan2014). Among study participants were graduate students in Germany and Ukraine, members of Erasmus higher education projects, and research associates in the Slovak Republic, Poland, Germany and Ukraine. The English proficiency of speakers ranged from the B1 to the C1 level according to the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (Council of Europe, 2001) classification. Participants were asked to answer the following questions:

1. (i) What standard of English (British English, American English) do you aim at?

2. (ii) Does it make a difference to you whether you communicate with native and non-native speakers of English?

3. (iii) Could you specify the differences – if any – in communication with native and non-speakers of English?

4. (iv) Who do you prefer – native or non-native speakers – as interlocutors?

5. (v) What is your worst fear when you communicate with native speakers of English (non-native speakers of English)?

6. (v) What is your attitude toward English as a Lingua Franca or English as an International Language? Do you see any advantages and disadvantages in this development?

The survey of ELF attitudes was carried out within the folk linguistics perspective; hence the evaluations and attitudes discussed below represent the speakers' beliefs about the role of English as a Lingua Franca and issues related to it.

Slavic speakers and benchmarks on learning English

Before questioning the attitude of Slavic speakers toward the use of English in the international settings, and perceived advantages and disadvantages of this development, it is important at first to investigate the benchmarks that guide learners in the process of language learning. To give insights into this issue, participants were asked to comment on the following questions: ‘What is your standard in learning English? What is your role model?’

Fourteen out of fifteen speakers understood the question correctly and were willing to contribute. One speaker did not understand the question even after many attempts by the interviewer to clarify it; he, therefore, did not provide any answer to it and switched to another topic. The results are presented in Table 1 below:

Table 1: The role models of Slavic speakers in learning English

Although British English is often chosen by language educators as a teaching model in the countries of Eastern Europe (see Panova, Reference Panova, Andriyko, Tezikova, Potapenko and Chekal2010: 35 for the situation in Ukraine), there is a tendency among the speakers to prefer American English. One of the most obvious reasons for this tendency, not directly mentioned in the speakers' interview replies, is the ‘Americanization’ of Eastern Europe in general, and in film and music industries in particular (Stephan Reference Stephan2007: 12). The groups of reasons identified in the interviews were: (i) familiarity with the country and people; (ii) possible future encounters with speakers of a particular variety; (iii) feeling ‘comfortable’ or ‘at ease’ with a particular variety, and (iv) ‘it sounds better to me’.

The category of ‘familiarity with the country and people’ was broadly defined, including such experiences as participating in academic exchange programs, taking language tests such as IELTS and TOEFL, and contacts with speakers of a particular variety. What was fundamental was that speakers were familiar with an accent and, therefore, felt comfortable in the communicative encounters where this accent was used. Thus, all kinds of past encounters with the country and people were included in this group. This group of reasons is what Jenkins referred to as ‘familiarity with an accent’ (Jenkins, Reference Jenkins2007: 182).

In the following two examples native speakers of Ukrainian and Russian justify their preference for American English by saying that (i) North American countries were the first countries visited, and (ii) TOEFL was the exam prepared for. See the comments below:

1. (1) United States and Canada was the first English speaking country to which I came first. (L1 Ukrainian)

2. (2) I prepared it (American English) for the exam, which is TOEFL, so it's not British. (L1 Russian)

Clearly, in stating their preference, the speakers are not guided by the syntactic features of a variety, but by their previous exposure to the accent and speakers of a particular variety.

The second reason for the speakers' choice includes possible future encounters with the speakers of a particular English variety. A Russian native speaker, for example, believes that he is likely to communicate more frequently with speakers from the US and Australia, rather than with speakers from the UK.

Whereas the first two ways of justifying the preference are grounded in reasons of consciousness, previous experiences and expectations, the following two lines of reasoning are based on the speakers' intuitive beliefs. Such arguments as ‘I feel comfortable’ or ‘it sounds better to me’ often arise in the interviews, and often are the only reasons given for the preference of one variety over the other.

One argument that only appears in the British context emphasizes the role of British English in providing norms and standards. American English, on the contrary, is seen as a simplified form of British English. The comment in (3) illustrates this:

1. (3) Ah So I still think that British English is a kind of Standard English. And if I compare American English and British English so I I think that American English is easier, because I think that Americans omit a lot of tenses to use. (L1 Ukrainian)

Although study participants openly express their preferences and learning goals, some of them critically assess the conditions for achieving these aspirations. When asked to comment on a role model in language learning, a Ukrainian speaker replied that this was ‘Ukrainian English’:

1. (4) We say, Ukrainian English. That's a joke we have at our department. We teach British English, we are supposed to teach British English, but at our department, we never had person from Britain, who came to teach English. (L1 Ukrainian)

This statement clearly describes a situation in one of the language-teaching institutions in Ukraine; it, however, can also apply to other institutions, which provide language education in countries of Eastern Europe, and where American English does not compete with British English in taking over the function of a role model.

Native and non-native English(es)

This section discusses the following three points: (i) whether there is a difference for Slavic speakers in communication with English native and non-native speakers; (ii) what interlocutors – native or non-native speakers of English – Slavic study participants feel more comfortable with, and (iii) whether study participants have particular fears in ELF communication. Table 2 summarizes the results:

Table 2: Communication preferences of Slavic speakers

The four speakers who named native speakers as preferred communication partners had one common reason for their choice, namely they all wanted to improve their English and believed that the conversations with native speakers would help them achieve this. Non-native speakers were often said to be unable to fulfill this. The two speakers who named non-native speakers as their communication partners felt comfortable communicating with non-native speakers, as ‘non-native speakers do not hear the accent and the mistakes which are made, because we are on the same level’, and ‘they make mistakes and they are not so good in English’.

Asking speakers to express their opinions on preferred communication partners caused assessments towards native and non-native varieties of English. Reporting on their preference toward British English, speakers expressed their opinions on accents they were familiar with. One of these opinions – not particularly positive, though – concerned the Blackburn accent:

1. (5) South English is beautiful. I remember I have two girlfriends in Blackburn, one speaks with Blackburn accent second speaks with South accent, and South eh eh sounds very eh aristocratic, yeah and North and Blackburn, my husband says I don't want my son have Blackburn accent. (L1 Ukrainian)

Comments describing native English varieties often occurred in the context of comparison. In contrast to British English, American English was often said to be ‘more understandable’, ‘distinctive’, ‘more used nowadays,’ and ‘up–to date’. British English, on the contrary, was often characterized as ‘not so understandable’, ‘traditional’, and ‘classic’, ‘outdated’, and even ‘pathetic’ and ‘aristocratic’.

Non-native varieties of English also received clear evaluative comments. They were said to be less intelligible compared to native English varieties. In particular, the English spoken by Russian, Polish, and French speakers is negatively evaluated. See the comment below:

1. (6) I can tell when I can hear Russian accent <break> yeah, yeah. It's disgusting. (L1 Russian)

Further supporting the point that Russian English rarely receives a positive evaluation, this speaker refers to Russian speakers of English by saying the following:

1. (7) I know some Russian people have fear of accent, Russian accent. (L1 Russian)

The statement demonstrates that this speaker felt uncomfortable about her accent and its use in intercultural settings. The accents of Polish and French speakers were often described as ‘heavy’, causing comprehensibility problems.

The attitude toward English as a Lingua Franca

This section presents the results of the survey focusing on: (i) the attitude of Slavic speakers toward the use of English in intercultural settings, and (ii) the reasons given by Slavic speakers for the emergence of English as an International Language.

The most obvious observation is that Slavic speakers indeed treat English differently as compared to other foreign languages. That English is different from other languages was attributed to two different reasons: (i) the disassociation of English from its native speakers, its country, and traditions, and (ii) the simplification of English because of contact with other languages.

The first reason emphasizes that English is no longer seen by Slavic speakers as belonging to the English-speaking countries and communities, nations and cultures. See the excerpt below:

1. (8) I can't say that English is language for me. if I speak Italian I speak only with Italians, yes, only with native speakers. And if to say about English I spoke English very often with people who are not native speakers that is why I have more feeling that it's just the language for the world. (L1 Ukrainian)

This comment expresses a number of attitudes. First, the speaker questions the status of English comparing it with other languages. Expressing her opinion, the speaker mentions that Italian and German, for example, are often used for communication with their native speakers, unlike English. English, on the contrary, is ‘just the language for the world’.

The second group of effects is the simplification and reduction of the language. In (9), a Ukrainian speaker is not entirely sure whether frequent use of English is positive or negative:

1. (9) Well, positive or negative? I don't I am staying at the position, actually, that language change changes. (L1 Ukrainian)

Another Ukrainian speaker, in addition to simply confirming the statement, suggests reasons that cause the simplification of English:

1. (10) The language goes through all cultures and nations, so English is getting simplified; it's getting more simple. (L1 Ukrainian)

Thus, one of the explanations for the simplification and reduction of English, provided by the speakers, is contact of English with other languages and cultures. That the language contact issue was raised by study participants not only illustrates the speakers' willingness to account for contact-induced changes but also their awareness of existing contact situations, and the consequences of these for the language itself.

As all study participants agreed that English is an international language, they were asked to comment on why they thought English, and no other languages, had taken up this role. The two main reasons named by the speakers are: (i) the political and economic power of the US, and (ii) the simplicity and the ease of expression in English.

‘Simplicity of the language’, ‘easiness of expression, and ‘flexibility in speaking’ seemed to contribute to the growing importance of English in the intercultural context. Giving these reasons, speakers genuinely believed that English assumed the role of a lingua franca because of its linguistic characteristics. It is interesting that speakers often compare English with other languages better or less known to them, and conclude that English is easier to learn compared to other languages, Slavic languages for instance.

Some speakers not only express a positive attitude toward ELF, but also idealize the linguistic features of English. A Polish speaker of English, for example, considers English to be ‘the most beautiful language in the world’, and praises ‘the flexibility of the language’ and ‘the easiness of expression’ that English is able to offer.

It becomes clear that non-native speakers of English value the fact that English has become an international language. Also, apart from practical advantages that come along with the global spread of English, Slavic speakers feel attached to English because of its aesthetic features.

ELF communication: positive or negative?

I will now discuss the general consequences of the global use of English, specifying whether ELF communication is seen by Slavic speakers as benefiting or harming its native and non-native speakers. Dealing with ELF communication, it is important to keep the two groups – native and non-native speakers of English – apart, as the motivation behind their use of English is essentially different. When asked to comment on benefits and drawbacks of ELF communication, Slavic speakers mentioned the following aspects:

• - Communication across cultures, exchange of ideas

• - The stimulation and growth of business

• - The spread of British and American culture

• - The simplification and reduction of English

• - Neglect of other languages and cultures

As the attitude of Slavic speakers toward ELF is usually positive, Slavic speakers see ELF communication and the use of English for lingua franca purposes as advantageous. Some of the benefits mentioned by the speakers are (i) simplification of communication between cultures and nations, and (ii) the ability to exchange knowledge and ideas worldwide. Unlike some of the advantages that we shall see below, these seem to be to the benefit of both native and non-native speakers of English. For example, interviewees said that ‘English makes communication easier’, and English allowed them to participate in international degree programs, conferences, workshops, and trade fairs.

Also, English is said to function as a medium of communication between the speakers of the same first language. See the comment below:

1. (11) We have also one guy from Russia in our class, and sometimes we speak English as well with him, just because it became to be habit. (L1 Russian)

Another advantage of English use is the stimulation and growth of business in English-speaking and non-English speaking countries:

1. (12) For the language it's quite positive, and it's very positive for Great Britain, and all the English-speaking <break/> It's a good business for the native speakers and for the country, and positive in a sense, that there must be some kind of lingua franca. (L1 Slovak)

Other aspects of the global use of English that are advantageous for the native speakers of English and English-speaking countries are the development of English, and the spread of British and American culture. When a Ukrainian speaker was asked to specify positive aspects in the spread of English, she replied that it would be more promising to ask a native speaker rather than her. She then emphasized that native speakers of English should be proud of the fact that their language is used worldwide.

However, a positive attitude toward ELF communication did not stop study participants from seeing disadvantages in this development. The main downsides are the monopoly of English at the world arena and lost attention to and neglect of other foreign languages, as well as the simplification and reduction of English. Some speakers go as far as to make predictions about the role of English in changing global and local societies, and emphasize the importance of other languages. A comment by a Ukrainian speaker illustrates this:

1. (13) Well, positive or negative? I don't I am staying at the position, actually, that language change changes, so English, yeah, it's international language, and on another hand <quote> the more languages you know </quote> <break/>, you know this saying. It's necessary right now, and in my case it's also necessary to learn other international languages. (L1 Ukrainian)

Clearly, apart from seeing a number of advantages as the facilitation of communication, spread and exchange of information and ideas, Slavic speakers see disadvantages in the development and express concerns about the future of other languages in the context of cross-cultural communication.