Summary of results

The results revealed that the speakers were indeed perceived and interpreted differently by the listeners. The nine speakers scored at varying levels within the categories Power, Solidarity and Competence. The speakers with Dutch, Austrian and Polish accent fared well in regards to the three qualities Power, Solidarity, and Competence. Portugal, Italy, France and Germany were rated generally low while Spain and Sweden placed somewhere in the middle. Time spent abroad, as defined and used in this study, also had an effect on the listeners. attitudes and responses as well as their ability to identify a particular accent. The contact group was seemingly negatively impacted producing lower average score responses as well as a lower rate of correct identification, even in regard to their own non-native English speaker [Swedish – speaker number 5]. There was no strong overall tendency to evaluate Swedish highly though the Swedish speaker’s ethnicity was rather identifiable by the listeners.

While there exists a strong link between language and ethnicity, it is not a one-to-one relationship. I believe both the listeners and speakers in this study may have responded, had they been asked, differently in regards to their “grouping” and as to their strength as a member of the ethnic group in which I have categorized them. Loyalty to and identity with one’s in-group might occur at any level – local, municipal, provincial, regional, national or international. Most often, the strongest identity is found at the lower levels and then successively weakens as the in-group broadens.

These constructions are not only based on our personal history but also on functional interaction. In many ways it is not until we meet someone from an out-group that we are able to identify ourselves as part of an in-group. In particular the speakers in this study, as exchange students, may be reevaluating their “group” membership and redefining their identity based on new functional interaction. Their personal contact and experience, especially situation-based, may have drastically changed over the days, weeks, and months prior to the recordings as their identity may have shifted from a local level to a national level (e.g. a change from “I’m from Barcelona” to “I’m from Spain” except when meeting other Spaniards).

These differences may have been caused by their contact with foreigners or their time abroad. In this study the non-contact group seems to identify more strongly with other European non-native English speakers while the contact group does not. While contact and time abroad may be a decisive factor in this difference there exists perhaps some difference “at home” as well. Some of the students may have more contact with foreigners (for example, immigrants) without ever leaving Sweden.

Furthermore, the listeners’ education may have an impact on their identity. The International Baccalaureate Program is used throughout the world and embraces multiculturalism. It is offered in several languages but most prominently in English. The Swedish students who choose this program which is given in English would most likely have a particular predilection for English and internationalism and there by also an identity that lays at a level that is more national or international than local or regional. Surely these particular factors must impact one’s personal identity, one’s group identity, and therein a speaker’s accent and a listener’s reaction.

As I was recording the nine speakers, clearly they could be thought to be producing better English then than had they been unaware of the proceedings. In authentic social situations speakers should be more prone to communicate, to simply make themselves understood. It is only when evaluation comes into the picture that people, even native speakers, make an effort to produce correct English.

I believe that this choice can also be affected by the company kept. Anecdotally, I can state that many people feel awkward speaking a second or foreign language such as English with a native speaker. In a mixed ethnic group where no native speakers are present (and there is no other shared language), participants feel that English is a natural choice and that they are on a more even playing field. In a world where the number of non-native speakers of English continues to expand prolifically beyond the number of native speakers, it seems reasonable that more and more people will choose to simply communicate.

It is my personal experience that Swedes are particularly partial to near-native English as opposed to ethnic (read Swedish)-accented English. Many Swedes laugh or are embarrassed to hear Swedish journalists or politicians speaking accented English while surely the French population would be in an uproar if Chirac began speaking fluent British English.

While it is plausible for a non-native speaker to reach native-like language skills, it is neither always possible nor desirable.

Instruction:Don’t copyBritta Larson Bergstedt’s summary above, first of all, because she limits it to the results of her own experiment without setting connection with the first six paragraphs of the text. As there are quite a few references to interpretations of indicators of both personal and social accent characteristics, you will have to select those that may be considered valid for Bergstedt’s study. Be sure to describe the basic hypotheses and the stages of the experiment.

To repeat:

1. A summary begins with an introductory sentence that states the article's title and author.

2. A summary must contain the main thesis or standpoint of the text, restated in your own words. (To do this, first find the thesis statement in the original text.)

3. A summary cannot exceed 1/3 of the original.

5. A summary should contain all the major points of the original text, and should ignore most of the fine details, examples, illustrations or explanations.

4. The backbone of any summary is formed by crucial details (key names, dates, events, words and numbers). A summary must never rely on vague generalities.

5. A summary must contain only the facts and ideas of the original text. Do not insert any of your own opinions, interpretations, deductions or comments into a summary.

Important points to remember:

Make sure to include the author and title of the work.

Don't copy the article. Don't put your own opinions, ideas, or interpretations into the summary.

Be concise: a summary should not be equal in length to the original text. Instead, paraphrase. If you must use the words of the author, cite them. If you quote directly from the original text, use quotation marks. (Minimise how often you do this)

Write in the present tense.

The purpose of writing a summary is to accurately represent what the author wanted to say, not to provide a critique.

Edit what you write. Check your English grammar, spelling and punctuation mistakes.

Читайте також:

<== попередня сторінка	\|	наступна сторінка ==>
Procedure	\|

Не знайшли потрібну інформацію? Скористайтесь пошуком google:

Генерація сторінки за: 0.004 сек.