Dialect Variation and Second-Language Intelligibility

  • Miriam R. Eisenstein
Part of the Topics in Language and Linguistics book series (TLLI)

Abstract

Despite our growing awareness of variation and its role in second-language acquisition, and the recent attention given to variability in the learner’s inter-language (see Ellis, 1986), much current research and pedagogy presumes a single dialect of the target language as a baseline for the analysis of the learner’s comprehension and production. The limitations imposed by such an assumption are particularly inappropriate for the consideration of second-language acquisition in urban centers, which are likely to contain speakers representing a range of social and regional dialects. Hyltenstam (1981) and Kachru (1982) have emphasized the fact that many learners must communicate in an environment that involves contact with speakers of diverse target-language varieties.

Keywords

Language Acquisition Comprehension Score Nonnative Speaker DIAlECT Variation English Dialect 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. d’Anglejan, A. (1975). Dynamics of second language development. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. McGill University, Montreal.Google Scholar
  2. Bansal, R. K. (1969). The intelligibility of Indian English. Hyderabad: Central Institute of English and Foreign Languages (Monograph no. 4 ).Google Scholar
  3. Brodkey, D. (1972). Dictation as a measure of mutual intelligibility. Language Learning, 22, 203–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brown, G. (1986). Investigating listening comprehension in context. Applied Linguistics, 7, 284–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Douglas, D. (1988). Testing listening comprehension in the context of the ACTFL proficiency guidelines. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 10, 245–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Eisenstein, M. (1979). The development of dialect discrimination and stereotyping in adult learners of English as a second language. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. The Graduate Center, C.U.N.Y., New York.Google Scholar
  7. Eisenstein, M. (1982). A study of social variation in adult second language acquisition. Language Learning, 32, 367–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Eisenstein, M. (1983). Language Variation and the ESL Curriculum. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
  9. Eisenstein, M., and Berkowitz, D. (1981). The effect of phonological variation on adult learner comprehension. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 5, 75–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Eisenstein, M., and Hopper, S. (1983). The intelligibility of English social dialects for adult learners of English as a second language. Indian Journal of Applied Linguistics. 9. 43–52.Google Scholar
  11. Eisenstein, M., and Verdi, G. (1985). The intelligibility of social dialects for working-class adult learners of English. Language Learning. 35, 287–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ellis, R. (1986). Understanding second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Garrod, S. (1986). Language comprehension in context: A psychological perspective. Applied Linguistics, 7, 226–238.Google Scholar
  13. Hyltenstam, K. (1981). Understanding varieties of the target language. Working Papers, 20, 1–26 ( Lund University, Dept. of Linguistics ).Google Scholar
  14. Kachru, B. (1976). Models of English for the third world: White man’s burden or language pragmatics. TESOL Quarterly, 10, 221–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kachru, B. (1982). The other tongue. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  16. Krashen, S. (1981). Second language acquisition and second language learning. Oxford: Perga-mon Press.Google Scholar
  17. Nelson, C. ( 1981, March). Rhythm in non-native varieties of English. Paper presented at the International TESOL Conference. Detroit, Michigan.Google Scholar
  18. Nelson, C. (1982). Intelligibility and non-native varieties of English. In B. Kachru (Ed.), The other tongue (pp. 58–73 ). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  19. Shuy, R., Baratz, J., and Wolfram, W. (1968). Field techniques in urban language study. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Psychology.Google Scholar
  20. Smith, L., and Bisazza, J. (1982). The comprehensibility of three varieties of English for college students in seven countries. Language Learning, 32, 259–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Smith, L., and Rafiqzad, K. (1979). English for cross-cultural communication: The question of intelligibility. TESOL Quarterly, 13, 371–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Swacker, J. (1977). Attitudes of native and non-native speakers toward varieties of American English. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Texas AandM University.Google Scholar
  23. Tucker, G. R., and Sarofim, M. (1979). Investigating linguistic acceptability with Egyptian ESL students. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 152 106)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • Miriam R. Eisenstein
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Communication Arts and SciencesNew York UniversityNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations