Vietnamese American Experiences of English Language Learning: Ethnic Acceptance and Prejudice

As the user of communication especially in English, the speaker has to consider the interlocutor’s position in order to achieve good communication. Here, the speakers which include native and non-native English speakers must choose an appropriate language style for the different interlocutors to avoid social consequences. The purposes of this research were to analyze the use of language style of those speakers in The Ellen Show. Also, it focused on the differences and the similarities between those speakers. Last, it focused on the factors influencing the use of language style. The research used the qualitative method which focuses on content analysis. Here, it focused on three native speakers and three non-native speakers of English as the guests in The Ellen Show. The Ellen Show is a talk show program with a casual discussion that talks about a particular topic or issue which consists of a host, the guest(s) being interviewed, the home audience, and the studio audience from which the host might get some responses from.The findings revealed that the native English speakers used all types of language styles. Meanwhile, the non-native speakers used three types of language styles. Then, the similarities were that both speakers applied formal style, consultative style, and casual style in their utterances. However, the difference was the non-native English speakers did not apply frozen style and intimate style. Furthermore, those speakers used language style because it influenced the participant, the setting, the topic, and the function. Therefore, it is concluded that language styles were useful in English utterances either by native speakers or non-native English speakers.
 
 The speaker has to consider the interlocutor’s position in order to achieve good communication. Here, the speakers which include native and non-native English speakers must choose an appropriate language style for the different interlocutors to avoid social consequences. The purposes of this research were to analyze the use of language style of those speakers in The Ellen Show. Also, it focused on the differences and the similarities between those speakers. Last, it focused on the factors influencing the use of language style. The research used the qualitative method which focuses on content analysis. Here, it focused on three native speakers and three non-native speakers of English as the guests in The Ellen Show. The findings revealed that the native English speakers used all types of language styles. Meanwhile, the non-native speakers used three types of language styles. Then, the similarities were that both speakers applied formal style, consultative style, and casual style in their utterances. However, the difference was the non-native English speakers did not apply frozen style and intimate style. Furthermore, those speakers used language style because it influenced the participant, the setting, the topic, and the function. Therefore, it is concluded that language styles were useful in English utterances either by native speakers or non-native English speakers.

The cognitive interview is a widely recommended forensic interviewing strategy which elicits more details than comparison interviews. However, little research has attended to which of its component mnemonics drive the overall effect. Furthermore, some mnemonics—like asking witnesses to recall in reverse order—are cognitively demanding. Responding to cognitively demanding interview mnemonics may be challenging for witnesses who are already under heavy cognitive load, such as non-native English speakers. Speaking a second language is a cognitively difficult task that may leave non-native English speakers with limited cognitive resources to devote to complex interviewing mnemonics. Other mnemonics, though, may be particularly beneficial for non-native English speakers. For example, a transfer of control instruction, emphasizing that the witness has critical knowledge the interviewer needs to know, may help non-native English speakers overcome social barriers to reporting details in forensic interviews. The present study tests the effectiveness of the reverse order mnemonic and the transfer of control instruction compared to control interviews among native and non-native English speakers. Native speakers (N = 64) and non-native English speakers (N = vii 34) watched a mock crime video, completed a language history questionnaire, and were interviewed about the crime video using either a control (free recall + second recall attempt), reverse order (free recall + reverse order recall attempt), or transfer of control (instruction + free recall) protocol. Native English speakers provided more correct units than non-native English speakers, especially in the control condition’s second recall attempt (compared to the reverse order recall attempt). The transfer of control instruction had no effect on number of correct units provided in the first recall attempt of each condition. Accuracy rates were unaffected by language or interview condition, but non-native English speakers, particularly in the transfer of control condition, provided somewhat higher proportions of subjective details than native English speakers. These results suggest that non-native English speakers provide fewer details than native English speakers when interviewed in English, and the two mnemonics tested have little influence on speakers’ output. Future research should develop an interviewing protocol that is sensitive to the challenges faced by non-native speakers.

ABSTRACTWe explore how native and non-native English speakers interpret cues of emotional expression in native English speakers, text-only messages in two studies. In Experiment 1, 28 native English speakers and 28 Japanese non-native English speakers rated the emotional valence of 98 public Facebook status updates written by native English-speaking authors. We found that non-native speakers were less accurate at detecting the emotional valence and perceived messages more neutral or intensely negative than native speakers. In Experiment 2 we found that non-native speakers’ cultural background and lack of confidence in second-language ability may influence how they adjust their perceptions on a message based on subsequent replies. Our results contribute to theoretical development in multilingual socioemotional communication in computer-mediated environments and have implications for design of technologies to support socioemotional text-based communication between native and non-native speakers.

Most massive open online courses (MOOCs) are offered in English, including those offered by non-English speaking universities. The study investigated an identified English language dementia MOOC’s accessibility and effectiveness in improving the dementia knowledge of non-native English speaker participants. A total of 6,389 enrolees (age range 18–82 years; 88.4% female) from 67 countries was included in analyses. Dementia knowledge was measured by the Dementia Knowledge Assessment Scale (DKAS) before and after the MOOC completion. Rates of completion were also compared. Native English speakers (n = 5,320) were older, more likely to be female, less likely to be employed, and had lower educational attainment than non-native English speakers (n = 1025). Native English speakers were also more likely to care for or have cared for a family member or friend living with dementia than were non-native English speakers. Native English speakers had a significantly higher DKAS score both pre- (M = 33.0, SD = 9.3) and post-MOOC (M = 44.2, SD = 5.5) than did non-native English speakers (M = 31.7, SD = 9.1; and M = 40.7, SD = 7.7 for pre- and post-MOOC, respectively). Non-native English speakers with low pre-MOOC dementia knowledge scores gained significantly less dementia knowledge following course completion than did native English speakers (p <.001, adjusted for age and education). There was no significant difference between the two groups in their likelihood of completing the MOOC. Our findings suggest that non-native English speakers are motivated and able to complete the MOOC at similar rates to native English speakers, but the MOOC is a more effective educational intervention for native English speakers with low dementia knowledge.

English language is the first spoken language around the world, and it is the formal language for communication in my multilingual Saudi context. This paper is to conduct a further investigation to findings of a similar study conducted by Jumanto (2014) exploring the functions of phatic communication among English native speakers. Furthermore, this study aims at exploring phatic communication among native and nonnative English speakers in my workplace to have a healthy distinguished working atmosphere through guiding them to build a solid social relationship at workplace through involving in various communicative situations for the sake of rapport, not to convey information. For instance, to greet or reply to a greeting properly, start or end conversations with native or nonnative colleagues to avoid any inconvenience or misunderstanding due to the likely distinctions related to their different social or cultural backgrounds which may affect negatively on their relationship. To achieve this, an exploratory mixed study will be conducted in two phases using a questionnaire for quantitatively collected data, and then conducting semi-structured interviews for the same population to qualitatively collect data to have reliable findings. Additionally, the findings of this study reflect a great harmony among the phatic expressions used by native and nonnative speakers, especially native English speakers who try speaking the mother language, Arabic, of the nonnative English speakers for the purpose of greeting or starting interaction with each other. Accordingly, further research investigation could be conducted to explore the impact of phatic communication functions among native and nonnative speakers of any other languages on learning a second or a foreign language.

This paper analyses the strategies of language behaviour, differences in the didactic approach, and the role in the formation of intercultural communicative competence of native and non-native speakers. The authors examine the subject from the point of view of a native Russian teacher, a Maltese teacher who is a native English speaker only to some extent, and a Russian teacher of English as a foreign language, who is a non-native English speaker. According to the authors, both native and non-native speakers have their advantages and disadvantages. To compete with a native speaker, a non-native speaker must have the highest level of proficiency in the language being taught, and both native and non-native speakers must have appropriate professional training and have the necessary competencies.

SummaryDetecting lies is crucial in numerous contexts, including situations in which individuals do not interact in their native language. Previous research suggests that individuals are perceived as less credible when they communicate in a nonnative compared with native language. The current study was the first to test this effect in truthful and fabricated messages written by native and nonnative English speakers. One hundred native English speakers judged the veracity of these messages, and overall, they proved less likely to believe and to correctly classify nonnative speakers' messages; differences in verbal cues between native and nonnative speakers' messages partly explained the differences in the judgments. Given the increased use of nonnative languages in a globalized world, the discrimination against nonnative speakers in veracity judgments is problematic. Further research should more thoroughly investigate the role of verbal cues in written and spoken nonnative language to enable the development of effective interventions.

This paper considers the position of university language students whose mother tongue is other than the medium of instruction. Specifically, it investigates the attitudes and experiences of non-native English speakers studying either German or Japanese as foreign languages at an English-medium university. The findings indicate that the non-native speakers (NNSs) of English consider themselves to be at an advantage over the native speakers (NSs) of English in the study of German and Japanese as Foreign Languages, despite the fact that the medium of instruction is English, at least in the early stages of the language module. This is primarily owing to the fact that the non-native English speakers are already experienced language learners with an extensive linguistic repertoire. This view is supported by the NSs of English. Some concerns are expressed by non-native speakers of English in relation to an assumed knowledge of culture and society of the host country. The implications of these findings are discussed. Diverging from previous studies, this research focuses on learners of languages other than English and contributes to recent discussions on the increase in linguistic and cultural diversity and its impact within the foreign language classroom.

This study revealed the comparison of the use of discourse markers in English speeches between non-native and native speakers of English. The study focused on the types of discourse markers, the similarities and the differences between non-native and native speakers in using discourse markers. This study employed a qualitative research design with the data from the spoken discourse. The findings of the study showed that there were ten sub-categories of discourse markers that are practiced by non-native speakers, namely: assessment marker, manner of a speaking marker, evidential markers, hearsay markers, contrastive discourse markers, elaborative discourse markers, inferential discourse markers, discourse management markers, topic orientation markers, and attention markers. On the contrary, there were nine sub-categories of discourse markers that existed in English speeches, especially delivered by the native speakers such as assessment marker, manner of a speaking marker, evidential markers, hearsay markers, contrastive discourse markers, elaborative discourse markers, inferential discourse markers, topic orientation markers, and attention markers. The total of discourse markers produced by the non-native speakers was 301 utterances while native speakers of English were 269 utterances. Therefore, it is concluded that discourse markers were useful in English speeches either by non-native speakers or native speakers

1 IntroductionThe nature of differences between men and women has always interested humankind. Since our birth we have participated in the process of gender identity acquisition through multiple practices such as wearing a certain type of clothes, playing selected toys, and reading recommended books. These 'rituals' inevitably shape our society and enhance gender identity that further guides our life choices. There are choices that we make intentionally in order to meet society expectations. However, it is highly possible that gender identity could also guide some of our activities without our conscious consent. Normally, we do not pay attention to the way we talk, but our communication style might be correlated to our gender identity.During the last several decades the great interest in nature and existence of differences between men and women has increased. Particular attention has been given to the extent to which males and females use language differently (Newman, Groom, Handelman, & Pennebaker 2008:211-236). The difference in discourse gender patterns can lead to mutual misunderstanding in the course of verbal interaction. Thus, it is important to perceive the existence of certain gender patterns and build our discourse correspondingly.2 Language, gender, influences and discourseAs stated by Newman, Groom, Handelman and Pennebaker (2008:211-236), men and women use language differently. Significantly, it is the process of socialization that plays an important role in shaping gender identities (Gee 1992:19; Rossetti 1998). In other words, the use of language is socially biased and highly dependent on the expectations of society (Tannen 1995:138-148). Girls and boys receive different upbringing, often reflected in their roles and communicative styles (Rossetti 1998). Thus, through communication girls attempt to establish intimacy as a basis of friendship, while boys use language to establish their status and hence try to accomplish different discourse goals (Rossetti 1998). Tannen (1995:138-148) highlights that males use a direct and forceful communicative style, while females have a more indirect and intimate style of interaction, which results from the perception of women's role (females are communal, embodying emotional expressiveness and focused on the needs of others) and men's role (males are agentive, requiring action, self-expression, and individuality). The majority of studies have shown the consensus in the fact that males, in comparison to females, tend to use language more for instrumental purposes of conveying information, while women use it for social purposes with verbal communication serving as the end in itself' (Newman et al. 2008:211-236).The view which is followed in this paper defines discourse as practice that determines the use of language in the light of behaviour (Gee 1992:117; Schiffrin, Tannen, & Hamilton 2001: 538). Since gender identity depends on context (Masaitienė 2006: 295), it may be reasonable to expect that there will be gender differences in the discourse of native and non-native English language speakers (i.e. the contexts in which they learned the English language vary). To exemplify, the study of the discourse of native English speakers showed male dominance in the amount of talk (Masaitienė 2006:297), while the study of the discourse of non-native English speakers suggested female speaking time advantage. What is more, male non-native English speakers managed to utter more words per minute in all types of interactions, while female non-native English speakers tended to talk more only in mixed-gender conversations (Dobrica 2014:12). Dobrica (2014:20) and Masaitienė (2006:300-301) conclude that the discourse of both native and non-native English females strives to use collaboration and to build connections through interruptions and cooperative overlaps. Additionally, Dobrica (2014:21) states that native and non-native English speakers vary considerably in terms of exposing their gender identities in the course of communication. …

<p>This article was intended to explore the frequency and order of communication strategies used by Iranian male and female EFL earners as well as English native speakers while facing communication breakdowns. Furthermore, it was aimed to investigate the difference between native speakers and non-native speakers of English in their use of communication strategies. In addition, it was probed whether gender had any effects on the use of these strategies among native and non-native speakers. To this end, the data were collected through the communication strategy questionnaire distributed among 30 male and female Iranian intermediate EFL learners and 15 English native speakers. The design of this study was a quantitative one in which the questionnaire and thus numerical data were applied. To analyze the data, Cronbach alpha and independent-samples t-tests were used. The results indicated that non-verbal and social affective strategies were the most frequent strategies used by non-native speakers and native speakers of English, respectively. Furthermore, there was no significant difference between male and female Iranian EFL learners, but a significant difference between male and female English native speakers were seen. It can be concluded that language proficiency can contribute to the type and frequency of communications strategies which are used non-native speakers; likewise, it can play a significant role in gender differences in language use.<em></em></p>

An electromyographic investigation of the internal intercostal muscles in connected utterance together with an analysis of pause placement has been carried out with native and non-native (Asian) speakers of English. A characteristic pattern of muscle activity was found in native speakers. Its essential features were an overall progressive increase in activity throughout the item, localized bursts of activity before commencement of speech phrases, and decrease or cessation of activity with long pauses. The non-native speakers tended to produce repetitive EMG patterns within the one item. Another feature of their utterance was the use of numerous pauses, many of which were inappropriate in placement and duration. The physiological implications of this pattern are discussed. This faulty organization and timing of rhythm units was attributed to the syllable-timed nature of the subjects’ first language, to their method of learning English, and to their lack of experience in speaking English. The internal intercostal muscle activity pattern appeared to be related mainly to the speaker’s degree of linguistic proficiency.

Previous studies have found that but and so occur frequently in native and non-native English speakers’ speech and that they are easy to acquire by non-native English speakers. The current study compared ideational and pragmatic functions of but and so by native and non-native speakers of English. Data for the study were gathered using individual sociolinguistic interviews with five native English speakers and ten L1 Chinese speakers. The results suggest that even though the Chinese speakers of English acquired the ideational functions of but and so as well as the native English speakers, they underused the pragmatic functions of them. The findings indicate that there is still a gap between native and non-native English speakers in communicative competence in the use of but and so. The present study also suggests that speakers’ L1 (Mandarin Chinese) and overall oral proficiency in oral discourse affect their use of but and so.

The study seeks to add to the current debate on English as a lingua franca by analyzing the role of the native speakers of English in intercultural business negotiations and to what extent they effectively accommodate lingua franca speakers. The data, gathered from a sample of 14 native English speakers and 13 nonnative English speakers, consist of interactions collected through a discourse completion task and a short questionnaire. The results showed that the native speakers in this sample used a wider range of linguistic devices than the nonnative speakers. The majority of the native speakers attempted to accommodate nonnative speakers, but there was significant variation in the way that individual participants chose their strategies and approached accommodation. The most striking finding was the imbalance between the native speakers’ understanding of the issues of intercultural communication and their inability to effectively accommodate nonnative speakers. The implications are discussed.

The main purpose of this study is to investigate the syntactic and prosodic features of discourse markers (henceforth DMs) used by native and non-native speakers of English. Towards this end, an analysis model has been developed. It includes some of the DMs used and their functions. The proposed analysis model also includes the syntactic features such as types and positions of DMs, prosodic features, which incorporate types and functions of tones, and acoustic features associated with the DMs. The analysis model has been applied to native and non-native spoken discourse samples. Based on the results obtained from analysing such data, it is concluded that: (1) syntactically, like native speakers, non-native speakers have the choice to use the DMs at any position in discourse, (2) prosodically, non-native speakers tend to be more assertive and affirmative in their use of DMs than the native speakers of English, and (3) when non-native speakers converse with each other, the prosodic features of some of their DMs seem to be nearly the same in terms of pitch change/direction and duration.