Post by occam
This finding mirrors my experiences in an EU context. I have heard
nonnative English speakers express difficulty in understanding native
(BrE) speakers, whereas they have no such problems when speaking
perfectly good English to, say, a Dutch or Danish person.
Reasons that come to my mind:
Non-native speakers with the same native language or similar
native languages might speak similar variants of English,
maybe even with some English sounds substituted by sounds
of their native language.
For example, I believe that we Germans might insert glottal
stops and often not connect words. Two Germans might use the
same (German) stress pattern for words that are similar to
German words, like "category".
Non-native speakers with different native languages still
might use less connected speech and fewer reductions.
They might use more basic vocabulary and fewer rare words,
phrasal verbs and idioms. Maybe they speak slower.
Native speakers might even use a regional pronunciation
and maybe some regional vocabulary or idioms.
Now, let me look at that article:
|let's take a holistic approach
. I think this has nothing todo with the nativity of the
language. "Holistic" is just a word of elaborated language.
When a non-native speaker has a similar level of education
in similar areas he should understand this.
|you hit it out of the park!
Yes. I think you need to learn American culture to some
extend to understand the American language. This especially
includes the education system (e.g., what's "Junior High
[school]" or a "locker" [in a school], fraternaties, boy
scouts), but also sports, especially baseball, football and
basketball, and other cultural phenomenons (like holidays,
constitution amendments, well-known texts).
|Decades of research show
When one refers to research, it's more credible to give
|the native speaker doesn't know how to do what nonnative
|speakers do naturally: Speak in ways that are accessible to
|everyone, using simple words and phrases
Yes. For a non-native speaker it is more clear which
expressions belong to the basic vocabulary.
|"intervene!" - The professor was drawing attention to
|Rodríguez's way of pronouncing the word.
Hard to form an opinion about this without knowing
how he pronounced it. I can find:
(British: "ˌɪntəˈvin"). What can one get wrong there?
Maybe Rodríguez should just admit that he was not able
to pronounce it correctly than file a grievance?
(The "ᵊ" is a schwa that is inserted sometimes, while the
"ə̣" [my ad-hoc notation used above] is a schwa that is
So, the main difference is the [d]!
"complaint" - ok, non-native speakers sometimes do
not know the/a meaning of a word. Web:
|Vocabulary is so important; it is of much more importance
|than grammar. It is the key to communicate successfully
|with other people.
. Non-native listeners (like Yoshihiro Hattori) died because
they did not get "Freeze!".
|Hattori had limited English and was not wearing his contact
|lenses that evening, and it is possible that he did not
|understand Peairs' command to "freeze"
A "complaint" about a nurse and a complaint in the sense of
an illness are related: You can complain about a nurse and
you can complain about your body.
|clearly enunciating hard "t" and "r" sounds in your speech
|makes it easier for nonnative English speakers to
I reject the notion that native speakers should in any way
adapt to non-native speakers. Except maybe, in some cases,
for native speakers who need to routinely communicate with
non-native speakers as a part of their job.
|Please do the needful!
Is this Indian English? Web:
|"Please do the needful" sounds awkward, overly formal, even
. Not recommended!
"Good English", to me, is whatever variant of English I have
chosen to learn (i.e., American English with a General American
accent). "Bad English" is every other variant of English, like,
in my case, British, German or Indian English.