Abstract
English as an international language of communication is used by a growing number of people of different mother tongues and diverse cultural backgrounds. As a result, English has shown some distinct regional characteristics and resulted in different varieties in phonology. Many studies focused on the preference to British English or American English and some researchers analyzed different English phonological varieties from the theoretical perspective, while few empirical studies are seen in literature. This makes significant the present study, an empirical research on students’ intelligibility of six English phonological varieties.
This paper reports an empirical study on the intelligibility of American English, British English, Indian English, South African English, French English and China English, aiming to explore to what extent each English variety is intelligible to the English majors and find out factors affecting the intelligibility. This study also intends to reveal the differences of the intelligibility between the low-grade and high-grade learners. The investigation, characterized by a mixed-method approach to research, comprises three parts. The primary data are derived from three tests and two questionnaires, conducted on a sample of 200 English majors from comprehensive key universities. The major findings are summarized as follows:
Firstly, based on the Kachru’s three concentric circles model, the intelligibility of these six English varieties, in descending order, is: China English> English of the Inner Circle (American English, British English) > English of the Outer Circle (South African English, Indian English) > English of the Expanding Circle (French English). Except China English, the sequence accords with previous expectations. What’s more, the intelligibility of six English varieties is the lowest, then interpretability and the highest one is comprehensibility. In addition, although China English is the most intelligible one among the six English phonological varieties, it is difficult for participants to identify the speaker’s nationality.
Secondly, there are some differences in intelligibility to English majors at different grades. More specifically, students from the high-grade group have better intelligibility than those from the low-grade group.
Thirdly, the amount of exposure and familiarity are found to be factors contributing to higher intelligibility. Phonological problems that contribute to lower intelligibility are speed, clarity, fluency and pauses.
In light of the above findings, it is suggested that to cultivate English majors to be inter-culturally competent, it is pedagogically relevant to acquaint learners with a variety of pronunciations of English, instead of one or two standard varieties.
Key words：English majors, English phonological varieties, intelligibility
Contents
Abstract
中文摘要
Chapter One Introduction-3
1.1 Background of the Study-3
1.2 Objectives and Significance of the Study-4
1.3 Layout of the Thesis-5
Chapter Two Literature Review-6
2.1 Definitions of Key Terms-6
2.1.1 English as a Lingua Franca-6
2.1.2 English Phonological Varieties-6
2.2 Key Theories-7
2.2.1 Kachru’s Three Concentric Circles Model-7
2.2.2 Smith & Nelson’s Theory of Intelligibility-9
2.3 Related Studies-11
2.3.1 Intelligibility of Phonological Varieties to Non-Native Speakers-11
2.3.2 Factors Affecting Intelligibility-12
2.3.3 Methods of Research on Intelligibility-13
2.4 Analytical Framework of This Study-14
Chapter Three Methodology-17
3.1 Research Questions-17
3.2 The Participants-17
3.3 Instruments-17
3.3.1 Questionnaire-17
3.3.2 The Intelligibility Test-18
3.3.3 The Comprehensibility and Interpretability Tests-18
3.4 Data Collection and Analysis-19
Chapter Four Results and Discussion-21
4.1 Intelligibility, Comprehensibility and Interpretability-21
4.2 Difference Between Low-grade and High- grade Groups-23
4.3 Factors Affecting Intelligibility-25
4.3.1 Exposure-25
4.3.2 Familiarity-26
4.3.3 Speakers’ Vocal Features-28
Chapter Five Conclusion-30
5.1 Major Findings-30
5.2 Pedagogical Implications-31
5.3 Limitations and Suggestions for Future Research-32
Acknowledgements-34
References-35
Appendix Ⅰ: Questionnaire-38
Appendix Ⅱ: The Intelligibility Test-39
Appendix Ⅲ: The Comprehensibility and interpretability Test-41
