I innocently created a You Tube video for Farsi first language speakers, hoping to share insights gleaned from the number of Persian first language speakers I have worked with over the years, and it was very interesting.
The video had been on the net for some time with little scuttlebut, and then, about a week ago, a number of Persian first-language speakers (20 or so, perhaps in Iran) started watching it and commenting. Many of them were upset that was using the term "Farsi" because, in their opinion, it's an Arab bastardization of the real name, which a few of wrote should be "Parsi." They also informed me that as an English first language speaker myself, I should be using the term "Persian language" not Farsi, which to them would be like be saying "I speak francais or espanol." To me, this didn't seem to be a big deal ... I might say "I speak francais" for example, but apparently it was a much bigger issue for them.
They were also very unhappy that I mentioned they needed to work on their /v/ sound, claiming it was only their /w/ sound that is at issue. Interestingly enough, everyone is different, and the /v/ sound in American English is different from the one they are using, even though it is arguably closer to the expected American pronunciation when they attempt to make it than what happens when they try to pronounce a /w/. Of course, this brings us back to the classic linguistic argument about comparative analysis, which suggests on the one hand that if a sound doesn't exist in your first language, it will be hard for you to pronounce, but as we in the linguistics field know, this theory was debunked only a few years later when data from numerous studies suggested that some things (and not just in accent, but in grammar as well) are just easier to do than others (or more intuitive) regardless of one's first language. The /v/ sound may well be one of the ones that's just challenging for everyone. I have Persian first language clients who can make great /w/ sounds, but not native-like /v/'s. Go figure!
I find that Russian speakers with strong /v/'s need to learn to soften them, so no matter what your first lanaguage is, it is highly likely to impact your production of English if you are unaware of its influence.
I responded to the Farsi You Tube clients by apologizing for offending anyone. One person suggested I refer to my video as "Iranian/Perian or Farsi first-language Speakers Video" to cover all fronts and be politically-correct, but the biggest thing I was accused of was trying to change Persian accents or somehow disrespecting them, and nothing could be further from the truth. To set the record straight, I love all accents ... I'm not the one discriminating against people and not promoting them to the next level because of their accents. I'm one of the professionals attempting to help them!
Silicon Valley first language speakers of the "Persian" language, however, are a small subset of all Persian speakers, so I am the first to admit that my suggestions and lessons learned are completely biased by the select group I work with.
Sunday, November 1, 2009
Friday, October 30, 2009
Gaining Insight into the "Neutral" Accent
I talked to a "neutral" accent trainer in India this week. It was actually fascinating. I could clearly understand him, yet his accent was not one anyone would recognize.
He tells me that at some point, the decision makers around outsourced call centers in India decided to take the "best" of various accents and combine them - best meaning the easiest to pronounce, and perhaps the clearest.
For example, he mentioned the American /k/ sound is thought to be cumbersome and "too much work," so the British one has been integrated into the "neutral" accent. Likewise, the American stop /t/ in "important" is thought be easier to pronounce than the British equivalent.
It seems to be ( from the cursory phone meeting we had - very brief) that "tense" articulation is also part of the "neutral" accent. The focus was very much on the vowels, which makes a lot of sense. Clarity is key in this pursuit, not authenticity.
I'm planning to have a more in-depth conversation with him to determine exactly what "neutral" accent trainers focus on when working with Indian first-language speakers, (and also, how in the WORLD they can stay up all night just to be on US time and make that work for them long-term).
He mentioned they use my You Tube videos for training purposes, and that was the wonderful. I'm glad they are helpful to people in a remote land.
He tells me that at some point, the decision makers around outsourced call centers in India decided to take the "best" of various accents and combine them - best meaning the easiest to pronounce, and perhaps the clearest.
For example, he mentioned the American /k/ sound is thought to be cumbersome and "too much work," so the British one has been integrated into the "neutral" accent. Likewise, the American stop /t/ in "important" is thought be easier to pronounce than the British equivalent.
It seems to be ( from the cursory phone meeting we had - very brief) that "tense" articulation is also part of the "neutral" accent. The focus was very much on the vowels, which makes a lot of sense. Clarity is key in this pursuit, not authenticity.
I'm planning to have a more in-depth conversation with him to determine exactly what "neutral" accent trainers focus on when working with Indian first-language speakers, (and also, how in the WORLD they can stay up all night just to be on US time and make that work for them long-term).
He mentioned they use my You Tube videos for training purposes, and that was the wonderful. I'm glad they are helpful to people in a remote land.
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Cultural Differences - Timing
I'm becoming more and more aware of the cultural differences of doing business in India, especially at this point in regards to timing.
In the US, if a client is interested in something, especially for themselves rather than a full corporate program, the decision making process is pretty short: they sample, they buy or they think about it for a short time and buy, or they have a specific request (like call me in 3 months when my manager says there will be funding).
In India, I find things to be very different: more players, longer deicison making periods (or at least wait times), and less certainty in moving forward. Of course, it makes sense that spending corporate $$$ on training is tighter now and that things have to be looked with greater scrutiny, but the buying patterns are decisively different.
In some cases, they are unpredictable. Clients buy, but you don't see them coming! You may be in negotiation with someone who disppears and resurfaces with an intent to "go forward" unexpectedly or someone who seems on track to go forward may back out at the last minute with little or no explanation.
This can happen in the US, but usually it's related to the company making the sale dropping the ball in the communication or follow through process. With India, it seems to related to something else.
My focus is not on the frustration (although culturally, that is one component!) but rather on the opportunity to learn how Indians buy ... the mental process behind making a decision is culturally different from how Americans making buying decisions. I have a strong suspicion that knowledge in this area would not only help to make the process more comfortable but also would shed light on what to do and say (or not do and say!) along the way.
I welcome any thoughts/comments on this topic!
In the US, if a client is interested in something, especially for themselves rather than a full corporate program, the decision making process is pretty short: they sample, they buy or they think about it for a short time and buy, or they have a specific request (like call me in 3 months when my manager says there will be funding).
In India, I find things to be very different: more players, longer deicison making periods (or at least wait times), and less certainty in moving forward. Of course, it makes sense that spending corporate $$$ on training is tighter now and that things have to be looked with greater scrutiny, but the buying patterns are decisively different.
In some cases, they are unpredictable. Clients buy, but you don't see them coming! You may be in negotiation with someone who disppears and resurfaces with an intent to "go forward" unexpectedly or someone who seems on track to go forward may back out at the last minute with little or no explanation.
This can happen in the US, but usually it's related to the company making the sale dropping the ball in the communication or follow through process. With India, it seems to related to something else.
My focus is not on the frustration (although culturally, that is one component!) but rather on the opportunity to learn how Indians buy ... the mental process behind making a decision is culturally different from how Americans making buying decisions. I have a strong suspicion that knowledge in this area would not only help to make the process more comfortable but also would shed light on what to do and say (or not do and say!) along the way.
I welcome any thoughts/comments on this topic!
Thursday, October 8, 2009
Cost over Quality
I haven't been blogging for awhile. I admit it. Mostly because I've been focusing on our self-study program promotion and delivery in Silicon Valley. It's been a bit discouraging to approach the Indian market because I'm finding that there is a definite preference for "low cost" over "high quality."
As practitioners, we have to ask ourselves what our priorities are. Of course, we want to move into new markets and create niches for ourselves, and we often have to be creative to do that, but I find myself strategizing how to make it "cost effective" by international standards without compromising quality?
It's understandable that in Silicon Valley (where I live) people are willing to pay for value - they see and experience the difference, have lived here for many years and already tried low-cost options that didn't yield a great result and are ready for something better, but what about internationally where the cost is the driving decision maker (or breaker)?
I found when discussing options with contacts in India that it was all about "price" and not about "how effective is your training? how is it different? what is the value?"
In the US, we take courses around "value proposition" and probably because everyone does, it's an easier concept to relate to and understand. The "cultural barrier" in a sense is conveying the long term potential (in profitability and quality)to the "gatekeepers" who are in the position to choose a more effective solution for their employees.
I'm in the processing of strategizing ways to reduce the "human effort" - which always reduces the cost! - like offering more video and self-learning as opposed to live instruction, especially a blended approach to get the value of both worlds, but the question is: what will finally win the approval of the "decision makers"? How do we make it cost effective without reducing quality?
Still struggling with this concept ... more to come.
As practitioners, we have to ask ourselves what our priorities are. Of course, we want to move into new markets and create niches for ourselves, and we often have to be creative to do that, but I find myself strategizing how to make it "cost effective" by international standards without compromising quality?
It's understandable that in Silicon Valley (where I live) people are willing to pay for value - they see and experience the difference, have lived here for many years and already tried low-cost options that didn't yield a great result and are ready for something better, but what about internationally where the cost is the driving decision maker (or breaker)?
I found when discussing options with contacts in India that it was all about "price" and not about "how effective is your training? how is it different? what is the value?"
In the US, we take courses around "value proposition" and probably because everyone does, it's an easier concept to relate to and understand. The "cultural barrier" in a sense is conveying the long term potential (in profitability and quality)to the "gatekeepers" who are in the position to choose a more effective solution for their employees.
I'm in the processing of strategizing ways to reduce the "human effort" - which always reduces the cost! - like offering more video and self-learning as opposed to live instruction, especially a blended approach to get the value of both worlds, but the question is: what will finally win the approval of the "decision makers"? How do we make it cost effective without reducing quality?
Still struggling with this concept ... more to come.
Sunday, August 2, 2009
Comment from a reader on the Neutral Accent
In case some of you missed the comment to an earlier post, I'm reprinting it here for clarification. This is a reader's perspective on the "neutral accent" and sheds some light on the issue:
I'd like to give a little perspective to the use of the term "neutral accent" across BPOs in India. I joined the BPO industry in 1999 and was trained on American accent for 3months. We listened to American speakers and tried to embibe their pronunciation, intonation pattern and idioms/slang. After 3months, when we went on calls, the customers said that we had a weird accent and asked which part of America we were from. I remember a colleague of mine whose first language was Bengali interchanged the s/sh sound. So, he would roll the r like the Americans, however; would ask the customer "may i have the shocial security number?". Likewise, another colleage from another north eastern state used to interchange the oo/uh sound. So would ask "can i poot the call on hold"? However; all of us were well trained to roll the r, say caaffee instead of cawfee, aesk instead of ask. After 6 months, we were sent back to training and the objective was to get rid of the put on American accent and get the sounds rights. Thats when the term "neutral"accent came into being. It is an accent which does not have an influence of the first langauge and is globally understood. None of the native English speakers(Americans, Australians, English, Canadians) will say fud for food Or bijness for business or pleyur for pleasure but a person from the north eastern states of India will have a tendency of interchaning the long n short vowel sounds and zh/z Or s/sh. Likewise, ppl from down south have a tendency to interchange s/z eg.liztening instead of listening etc..Therefore; when we hire people for BPOs now, there is a list of sounds that we check a person on. Some sounds are categorized as fatal which means that the person will take a long time to overcome the FLI. When we train people in BPOs, we tell the agents now that if you say ask or aesk, the native English speaker will understand you. Therefore; the neutral accent comprises of widely accepted pronunciation which could be either American or British. The emphasis is on clear articulation of sounds. Similarly, the agents are taught the idioms and slang specific to the culture;however; the clear objective is comprehension and not usage. I still remember my first day on OJT 10yrs ago when i asked for the customer and the gatekeeper said that he is 6 feet in the hole. Guess what, my response was when will he back from there and the gatekeeper said that honey you'll have to go up there to meet him. I thought 6 feet in the hole meant he was in the basement and since there is poor connectivity in the basement so may be the person cant take the call. After the call, my trainer called me and explained that it meant the person is dead. Not many understand when the a native English speaker says "he kicked the bucket". The natural response is "hope he didn't hurt himself badly". These days the emphasis is on these nuances because it is not the accent which leads to a communication breakdown as much as lack of cultural understanding.
At the end of the day even the global customers understand and accept the fact that we cant speak like them and they are perfectly okay as long as they dont have a tough time understanding us and vice-versa.
Regards
Tina
I'd like to give a little perspective to the use of the term "neutral accent" across BPOs in India. I joined the BPO industry in 1999 and was trained on American accent for 3months. We listened to American speakers and tried to embibe their pronunciation, intonation pattern and idioms/slang. After 3months, when we went on calls, the customers said that we had a weird accent and asked which part of America we were from. I remember a colleague of mine whose first language was Bengali interchanged the s/sh sound. So, he would roll the r like the Americans, however; would ask the customer "may i have the shocial security number?". Likewise, another colleage from another north eastern state used to interchange the oo/uh sound. So would ask "can i poot the call on hold"? However; all of us were well trained to roll the r, say caaffee instead of cawfee, aesk instead of ask. After 6 months, we were sent back to training and the objective was to get rid of the put on American accent and get the sounds rights. Thats when the term "neutral"accent came into being. It is an accent which does not have an influence of the first langauge and is globally understood. None of the native English speakers(Americans, Australians, English, Canadians) will say fud for food Or bijness for business or pleyur for pleasure but a person from the north eastern states of India will have a tendency of interchaning the long n short vowel sounds and zh/z Or s/sh. Likewise, ppl from down south have a tendency to interchange s/z eg.liztening instead of listening etc..Therefore; when we hire people for BPOs now, there is a list of sounds that we check a person on. Some sounds are categorized as fatal which means that the person will take a long time to overcome the FLI. When we train people in BPOs, we tell the agents now that if you say ask or aesk, the native English speaker will understand you. Therefore; the neutral accent comprises of widely accepted pronunciation which could be either American or British. The emphasis is on clear articulation of sounds. Similarly, the agents are taught the idioms and slang specific to the culture;however; the clear objective is comprehension and not usage. I still remember my first day on OJT 10yrs ago when i asked for the customer and the gatekeeper said that he is 6 feet in the hole. Guess what, my response was when will he back from there and the gatekeeper said that honey you'll have to go up there to meet him. I thought 6 feet in the hole meant he was in the basement and since there is poor connectivity in the basement so may be the person cant take the call. After the call, my trainer called me and explained that it meant the person is dead. Not many understand when the a native English speaker says "he kicked the bucket". The natural response is "hope he didn't hurt himself badly". These days the emphasis is on these nuances because it is not the accent which leads to a communication breakdown as much as lack of cultural understanding.
At the end of the day even the global customers understand and accept the fact that we cant speak like them and they are perfectly okay as long as they dont have a tough time understanding us and vice-versa.
Regards
Tina
Friday, July 24, 2009
Can we "simulate" the perfect American Accent?
I find myself pondering whether it is realistic to expect people living in one country and offering phone support to people in another one to acquire the accent of the country where they offer phone support ... without ever visiting or living in the country? Is it even possible on a grand scale?
It's an interesting paradox because in a sense we're creating a win-win - people looking for jobs can find them in another country, and often they are willing to make extreme changes to their speech to qualify for the jobs, and those looking to reduce their labor costs can also find that, but can we "simulate" the perfect American Accent?
Even if someone watches American tv and in every other way immerses him or herself in American culture, will the result eventually be to transition to the target accent? What else is required?
I've known for some time that systematic correction from a speech professional works, but the underlying assumption is "communicative competence" - that is, we assume the person already speaks and understands English well. If we depart from this assumption, and instead add the potential "ambiguity" that the trainees may not completely understand us and even if fluent in English, may not fully understand "American" English in terms of implications, intent, or cultural context, then can we really expect this same type of correction to work? That is, to yield the result of someone living in another country speaking "American" English with an "American" accent?
Of course, you will hear people say, "I'm speaking American English every day on the job," but we all know this doesn't mean any awareness is there or that anyone is giving them feedback and certainly no correction is taking place (it would be kind of inappropriate!) This probably means although English is being spoken, the same mistakes are occurring over and over again (and getting reinforced), which doesn't support change.
Knowing this is one thing ... now, how to do something about it! As Sonja Koppensteiner commented earlier (very insightful), it's important to set expectations. People can learn to do their jobs better (by acquiring an accent in this case) without changing who they are as human beings. It's just part of the job! How to set those expectations?
Here are few thoughts:
make sure all the stakeholders realize the commitment level and are willing to do what it takes -it's not going to be easy or happen over night
make sure participants define focused ways to "practice" understanding that it's all about awareness, not doing mindless exercises or "homework" to get it over with
insure participants take an "active" rather than a "passive" role in the training - let them drive the topics and pace as much as possible
build in "checkpoints" along the way with all stakeholders - is it working?
to some extent, be flexible as a provider to let participants "learn the hard way" - that is, try things that are intuitive to them, but not likely to work, and then ask the hard questions in the next session to prevent wasted effort: "how did that work out for you?" - like memorizing the dictionary!
learn from the process ... as with all things :-) ,
It's moving along this week - in the analysis phase with 2 client companies in India, and it's been an interesting experience so far. Details to follow in subsequent blogging endeavors!
It's an interesting paradox because in a sense we're creating a win-win - people looking for jobs can find them in another country, and often they are willing to make extreme changes to their speech to qualify for the jobs, and those looking to reduce their labor costs can also find that, but can we "simulate" the perfect American Accent?
Even if someone watches American tv and in every other way immerses him or herself in American culture, will the result eventually be to transition to the target accent? What else is required?
I've known for some time that systematic correction from a speech professional works, but the underlying assumption is "communicative competence" - that is, we assume the person already speaks and understands English well. If we depart from this assumption, and instead add the potential "ambiguity" that the trainees may not completely understand us and even if fluent in English, may not fully understand "American" English in terms of implications, intent, or cultural context, then can we really expect this same type of correction to work? That is, to yield the result of someone living in another country speaking "American" English with an "American" accent?
Of course, you will hear people say, "I'm speaking American English every day on the job," but we all know this doesn't mean any awareness is there or that anyone is giving them feedback and certainly no correction is taking place (it would be kind of inappropriate!) This probably means although English is being spoken, the same mistakes are occurring over and over again (and getting reinforced), which doesn't support change.
Knowing this is one thing ... now, how to do something about it! As Sonja Koppensteiner commented earlier (very insightful), it's important to set expectations. People can learn to do their jobs better (by acquiring an accent in this case) without changing who they are as human beings. It's just part of the job! How to set those expectations?
Here are few thoughts:
It's moving along this week - in the analysis phase with 2 client companies in India, and it's been an interesting experience so far. Details to follow in subsequent blogging endeavors!
Monday, July 20, 2009
What exactly is a Neutral Accent?
The first topic I wrote about here has proved to be the most controversial and generated the most commentary, so I thought I'd revisit it and ask some questions to gain clarity.
First, though, I think it's important to mention that since there are so many accents, it makes sense that the collective "we" would seek a standard, as we do in any industry from computers to phones. We don't always agree, but establishing a standard can be useful and powerful, like standardizing on the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA) as opposed to every country using a different English Alphabet.
So, here are few questions to ponder:
1. What defines a "neutral" accent? (How do we know it's "neutral"?)
2. Has anyone (any board or organization) set out parameters or standards for a "neutral" accent?
3. Does anyone know of a program that will train you in a "netural" accent - as opposed to an American one, a British one, or a regional one (such as dialect training)? If so, which program(s) do you know of?
4. Does anyone know how companies in India who wish to create a "neutral" accent go about doing it? Do they just hire a range of first language accented trainers and hope employees will benefit from hearing them all (randomly) or do they seek to train employees on each accent by defining the ones they are interested in and pursuing them specifically?
5. Even within a country, there are a multitude of accents, so how do we decide which British, Australian or American Accent is desired? Do we have to train on each of them? And then who decides which components constitute a "neutral" accent?
6.I've heard it said that a neutral accent is one "everyone" can understand easily - like the English newscasters study to speak broadly across a country; but can we apply this to world English?
Incidentally, one of the things a "neutral" accent reminds me of is the "Transatlantic" Accent of the 40's (in the sense that it was a "general" accent that those in media world were expected to emulate), and this is a discussion on how to define this accent: http://www.antimoon.com/forum/t4244.htm This discussion caught my attention because they are asking some of the same questions we are asking today with regard to a "neutral" accent.
First, though, I think it's important to mention that since there are so many accents, it makes sense that the collective "we" would seek a standard, as we do in any industry from computers to phones. We don't always agree, but establishing a standard can be useful and powerful, like standardizing on the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA) as opposed to every country using a different English Alphabet.
So, here are few questions to ponder:
1. What defines a "neutral" accent? (How do we know it's "neutral"?)
2. Has anyone (any board or organization) set out parameters or standards for a "neutral" accent?
3. Does anyone know of a program that will train you in a "netural" accent - as opposed to an American one, a British one, or a regional one (such as dialect training)? If so, which program(s) do you know of?
4. Does anyone know how companies in India who wish to create a "neutral" accent go about doing it? Do they just hire a range of first language accented trainers and hope employees will benefit from hearing them all (randomly) or do they seek to train employees on each accent by defining the ones they are interested in and pursuing them specifically?
5. Even within a country, there are a multitude of accents, so how do we decide which British, Australian or American Accent is desired? Do we have to train on each of them? And then who decides which components constitute a "neutral" accent?
6.I've heard it said that a neutral accent is one "everyone" can understand easily - like the English newscasters study to speak broadly across a country; but can we apply this to world English?
Incidentally, one of the things a "neutral" accent reminds me of is the "Transatlantic" Accent of the 40's (in the sense that it was a "general" accent that those in media world were expected to emulate), and this is a discussion on how to define this accent: http://www.antimoon.com/forum/t4244.htm This discussion caught my attention because they are asking some of the same questions we are asking today with regard to a "neutral" accent.
Thursday, July 16, 2009
Yes, there's a need ...
The need is there, but what's the solution?
In the last week, I've been working with 3 clients in India ... different clients, different needs, all in India.
One is with a US decision maker - one is with a US and an Indian decision maker - and one is with an Indian decision maker (with some undisclosed "higher ups" who really have the final word).
What I'm discovering is just how different US delivery to a US-based audience is from delivery in India. Yes, cultural issues abound, but in addition, it's really just dealing with this pesky issue of "communicative competence" again - after all, in the US, it really is all about accent for the most part. PhD & MBA clients who have lived here for years generally speak in grammatically correct sentences with a good foundation in our culture and how to function ... they just have accents ... been there, done that!
The new challenge (to me, not to those in India ... it's been there for awhile now) is how to deal with customers in the US talking to representatives in India. They live there but want to be perceived as "American" during the workday ( which, incidentally could be the evening/night hours) and then go home and speak their own languages (or Indian English)to friends & family.
Is it possible to lead a double-life? I'm pondering this issue. They aren't, after all, actors like Jack Nicholson or even the Amy Walker of 21 Accents on You Tube (and you should ***DEFINITELY*** check that out if you haven't seen it yet - she's so very talented). Here's the link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UgpfSp2t6k
These are the common guys and gals just wanting to do a day's work, and this is part of the "job requirement." And it's my job to get them to "sound American" ... (that's in yesterday's blog and not going there right now) in as little as 2 months ... I'm past "can it be done?" and on to "how am I going to do it?"
Still pondering ... in the diagostic phase ... it has potential to develop into a love/hate relationship, but mostly in the "honeymoon" stage right now!
In the last week, I've been working with 3 clients in India ... different clients, different needs, all in India.
One is with a US decision maker - one is with a US and an Indian decision maker - and one is with an Indian decision maker (with some undisclosed "higher ups" who really have the final word).
What I'm discovering is just how different US delivery to a US-based audience is from delivery in India. Yes, cultural issues abound, but in addition, it's really just dealing with this pesky issue of "communicative competence" again - after all, in the US, it really is all about accent for the most part. PhD & MBA clients who have lived here for years generally speak in grammatically correct sentences with a good foundation in our culture and how to function ... they just have accents ... been there, done that!
The new challenge (to me, not to those in India ... it's been there for awhile now) is how to deal with customers in the US talking to representatives in India. They live there but want to be perceived as "American" during the workday ( which, incidentally could be the evening/night hours) and then go home and speak their own languages (or Indian English)to friends & family.
Is it possible to lead a double-life? I'm pondering this issue. They aren't, after all, actors like Jack Nicholson or even the Amy Walker of 21 Accents on You Tube (and you should ***DEFINITELY*** check that out if you haven't seen it yet - she's so very talented). Here's the link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UgpfSp2t6k
These are the common guys and gals just wanting to do a day's work, and this is part of the "job requirement." And it's my job to get them to "sound American" ... (that's in yesterday's blog and not going there right now) in as little as 2 months ... I'm past "can it be done?" and on to "how am I going to do it?"
Still pondering ... in the diagostic phase ... it has potential to develop into a love/hate relationship, but mostly in the "honeymoon" stage right now!
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
The Accent "Perception"
Probably because I have the job I do, I don't really hear a lot from people who feel accent is a "delicate" issue anymore, but this perception definitely still exists. I was reminded of this recently at a networking event for "Indus Entrepreneurs" - basically, people from India starting companies.
I was in a small group of people, primarily born and raised in the US, and one Indian person joined the group. We all introduced ourselves, and when I stated my profession, she addressed everyone and said, "I don't know why they offer this kind of service; everyone can understand people from other places. I don't think there is a need." No one really said much, and the conversations continued. It didn't really concern me because everyone is certainly entitled to have an opinion, and accent work is not for everyone anyway.
The interesting part was later that evening when I was leaving another small group to grab a refreshment. I met up with one the US born networkers from the earlier group. She came up to me as if to share a secret: "Could you believe it!" I had to ask her what she was referring to, and she responded: "The Indian woman in that group earlier ... she had such a strong accent; I could hardly understand a word she said! And she was telling us accent work isn't needed? Boy, you have your work cut out for you!"
The interesting part to me is that accent is really all about perception. Whether someone has an accent that is challenging or easy to understand depends on a whole range of criteria from who the audience is to what the expectations are to what experiences each of us has had to perhaps what are ears are tuned to.
Of course, I am in the "neutral" category ... I noticed her accent, but I didn't judge it. I always tell people, "I'm the worst person to ask how strong your accent is or whether it's distracting." As a linguist, if someone only knows 2 words in English - my question is "Which 2?" Never a judgment of proficiency, just a genuine interest in how we acquire another language: in what order? in what way? and lastly ... how do we perceive an "accent" anyway?
It was so interesting to me that the woman making the comment had absolutely no idea that someone else was having difficulty understanding her. In our culture, it's not polite to say. That will certainly be the subject of a future posting!
I was in a small group of people, primarily born and raised in the US, and one Indian person joined the group. We all introduced ourselves, and when I stated my profession, she addressed everyone and said, "I don't know why they offer this kind of service; everyone can understand people from other places. I don't think there is a need." No one really said much, and the conversations continued. It didn't really concern me because everyone is certainly entitled to have an opinion, and accent work is not for everyone anyway.
The interesting part was later that evening when I was leaving another small group to grab a refreshment. I met up with one the US born networkers from the earlier group. She came up to me as if to share a secret: "Could you believe it!" I had to ask her what she was referring to, and she responded: "The Indian woman in that group earlier ... she had such a strong accent; I could hardly understand a word she said! And she was telling us accent work isn't needed? Boy, you have your work cut out for you!"
The interesting part to me is that accent is really all about perception. Whether someone has an accent that is challenging or easy to understand depends on a whole range of criteria from who the audience is to what the expectations are to what experiences each of us has had to perhaps what are ears are tuned to.
Of course, I am in the "neutral" category ... I noticed her accent, but I didn't judge it. I always tell people, "I'm the worst person to ask how strong your accent is or whether it's distracting." As a linguist, if someone only knows 2 words in English - my question is "Which 2?" Never a judgment of proficiency, just a genuine interest in how we acquire another language: in what order? in what way? and lastly ... how do we perceive an "accent" anyway?
It was so interesting to me that the woman making the comment had absolutely no idea that someone else was having difficulty understanding her. In our culture, it's not polite to say. That will certainly be the subject of a future posting!
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
But will they "sound American?"
I was talking to a client today who outsources to India, and he asked me if I could guarantee that participants in my programs would "sound American" and "meet his expectations" when they were finished. This gave us an opportunity to discuss what his expectations were, which he defined as "not distracting clients with foreign sounding speech."
Of course, it's difficult to assess improvement in terms of "sounding American" beyond pronunciation, and the client admitted he outsources to a variety of places, including South Africa, and has not visited India himself. I suggested that cultural issues play a big role in one's ability to "sound American" - what you say is just as important (if not more ), than how you say it, such as how assertive/passive you are, what kinds of questions you ask, how you respond and make decisions, take action (or don't), make comments and communicate with clients is largely culturally-driven and can be just as important as having a clear accent.
I pointed out that some people just aren't as motivated as others to acquire an American Accent, and living outside the US creates an extra challenge. "Sounding American" means both wanting to and immersing yourself in the culture enough (even if vicariously)to know how to do it.
We discussed a variety of ways to do an immersion outside the country: watching Good Morning America, CNN, American tv shows & films - recording and replaying, while focusing first on comprehension, and then on developing an "awareness" of tone, expressions, pacing, mouth movement, pausing, jaw movement, phrasing, vocabulary, idioms ... and the list goes on.
We also talked about hiring people who are already motivated ... not only to do the job, but to actively acquire an American Accent. I remember meeting with a visitor from India from a client company who told me he resented having to learn an American Accent just to keep his job. On the other extreme, I've met people in India who know more about our culture than I do ... (literally all kinds of facts & figures I'm not aware of), merely out of interest to truly develop a deeper understanding of our culture. There are people out there interested pursuing with a passion anything from candy wrappers to cheesy soap operas, but one could argue that's a bit extreme to be healthy.
The answer to the question? "Sure, they'll sound more American ... probably."
Of course, it's difficult to assess improvement in terms of "sounding American" beyond pronunciation, and the client admitted he outsources to a variety of places, including South Africa, and has not visited India himself. I suggested that cultural issues play a big role in one's ability to "sound American" - what you say is just as important (if not more ), than how you say it, such as how assertive/passive you are, what kinds of questions you ask, how you respond and make decisions, take action (or don't), make comments and communicate with clients is largely culturally-driven and can be just as important as having a clear accent.
I pointed out that some people just aren't as motivated as others to acquire an American Accent, and living outside the US creates an extra challenge. "Sounding American" means both wanting to and immersing yourself in the culture enough (even if vicariously)to know how to do it.
We discussed a variety of ways to do an immersion outside the country: watching Good Morning America, CNN, American tv shows & films - recording and replaying, while focusing first on comprehension, and then on developing an "awareness" of tone, expressions, pacing, mouth movement, pausing, jaw movement, phrasing, vocabulary, idioms ... and the list goes on.
We also talked about hiring people who are already motivated ... not only to do the job, but to actively acquire an American Accent. I remember meeting with a visitor from India from a client company who told me he resented having to learn an American Accent just to keep his job. On the other extreme, I've met people in India who know more about our culture than I do ... (literally all kinds of facts & figures I'm not aware of), merely out of interest to truly develop a deeper understanding of our culture. There are people out there interested pursuing with a passion anything from candy wrappers to cheesy soap operas, but one could argue that's a bit extreme to be healthy.
The answer to the question? "Sure, they'll sound more American ... probably."
Sunday, July 12, 2009
No Wonder Global Communication is a Challenge
I had an interesting experience at a group lunchtime seminar I was giving last week. I was speaking to a group at a company called "Zoran" and part way through the presentation, one of the participants raised his hand and asked "How do you pronounce our company name?"
My first reation was to feel a bit sheepish that I wasn't sure I was pronouncing it correctly. After collecting my thoughts, I realized, it wasn't obvious how to pronounce it. So, I asked the group (about 22 partcipants ) - what is the correct pronunciation of your company name?
About 5 different people gave 5 different answers! And the others remained silent. I took this as a "learning moment" and wrote the 5 answers on the board ( as close as we could come phonetically). One of the members of the group was a founder of the company, and a native Hebrew speaker ( the language the word "Zoran" comes from ... unbeknownst to me! ) He was one of the 5 who had replied.
I then proceeded to explain how I would determine the pronunciation of this word. I explained that I would probably stress the first syllable "ZOR.an" with long /ah/ or perhaps "ZOR.aen" or even use a "schwa" sound in the second syllable, but this isn't what any of the 5 people who responded were doing. Incidentally, none of them were native speakers of English. One was Korean, one was Chinese, one was Hebrew, one was Russian, and one was Vietnamese. All of them gave both syllables equal length!
At this point, we had a great opportunity to talk about word stress, but before I let it go, I asked the founder to once more say the word in its native pronunciation, and this time things got more interesting ... he said it louder, and we all listened intently, and I noticed the first sound he used doesn't exist it English. It wasn't a /z/, and /s/, a /dz/, a /zhe/ or anything else - it was a Hebrew sound the rest of us could not pronounce correctly. In addition, the second vowel was not an American vowel and the second syllable was not shorter. By defintion, none of the employees of the company had the tools they needed in their native languages to say the name of the company correctly, so we then set out to agree on a compromise, and I got a chance to explain American word stress.
When the session was over, one of the attendees ( a native speaker from HR who was just observing ) mentioned to me on her way out the door that she had struggled to pronounce the name of the company for months, much to her embarrassment, and had no idea why! She was so relieved to find out that everyone was in the same boat ... ( unless his / her first language was Hebrew, of course!)
This was not only an awareness in relation to foreign words. It also served as a helpful reminder that non-native speakers feel this way all the time when learning new English words. It's not simply a matter of learning new words; it's a matter of using sounds that are unfamiliar in word locations that are fundamentally unfamiliar while learning new words, which is, of course, a multi-faceted challenging task!
My first reation was to feel a bit sheepish that I wasn't sure I was pronouncing it correctly. After collecting my thoughts, I realized, it wasn't obvious how to pronounce it. So, I asked the group (about 22 partcipants ) - what is the correct pronunciation of your company name?
About 5 different people gave 5 different answers! And the others remained silent. I took this as a "learning moment" and wrote the 5 answers on the board ( as close as we could come phonetically). One of the members of the group was a founder of the company, and a native Hebrew speaker ( the language the word "Zoran" comes from ... unbeknownst to me! ) He was one of the 5 who had replied.
I then proceeded to explain how I would determine the pronunciation of this word. I explained that I would probably stress the first syllable "ZOR.an" with long /ah/ or perhaps "ZOR.aen" or even use a "schwa" sound in the second syllable, but this isn't what any of the 5 people who responded were doing. Incidentally, none of them were native speakers of English. One was Korean, one was Chinese, one was Hebrew, one was Russian, and one was Vietnamese. All of them gave both syllables equal length!
At this point, we had a great opportunity to talk about word stress, but before I let it go, I asked the founder to once more say the word in its native pronunciation, and this time things got more interesting ... he said it louder, and we all listened intently, and I noticed the first sound he used doesn't exist it English. It wasn't a /z/, and /s/, a /dz/, a /zhe/ or anything else - it was a Hebrew sound the rest of us could not pronounce correctly. In addition, the second vowel was not an American vowel and the second syllable was not shorter. By defintion, none of the employees of the company had the tools they needed in their native languages to say the name of the company correctly, so we then set out to agree on a compromise, and I got a chance to explain American word stress.
When the session was over, one of the attendees ( a native speaker from HR who was just observing ) mentioned to me on her way out the door that she had struggled to pronounce the name of the company for months, much to her embarrassment, and had no idea why! She was so relieved to find out that everyone was in the same boat ... ( unless his / her first language was Hebrew, of course!)
This was not only an awareness in relation to foreign words. It also served as a helpful reminder that non-native speakers feel this way all the time when learning new English words. It's not simply a matter of learning new words; it's a matter of using sounds that are unfamiliar in word locations that are fundamentally unfamiliar while learning new words, which is, of course, a multi-faceted challenging task!
Thursday, July 9, 2009
Communicative Competence
Gaining in necessity - with good reason - is the need for Communicative Competence in the Workplace. I'll skip the definition since it's included in my earlier blog ( see "Far Beyond Pronunciation from a couple of days ago) . More and more organizations aren't concerned with accent( or aren't comfortable talking about it if they are), and instead of focusing, perhaps rightly so, on the ability to communicate more holistically.
The interesting part is that getting from here to there isn't readily obvious to any of the stakeholders, not to educators, not to their intended audience and not to the companies that may be paying for softskills training.
There is no dearth of approaches to the problem: ignorance/denial (don't think about it and maybe it will go away ), traditional grammar & ESL classrooms, throw the non-native speakers in general communication with everyone else and hope they can figure out what words like "tonality" and "vocal variety" really mean ... huh??? or perhaps give them American Accent training because they aren't easy to understand.
The real answer is in exploring how to address communicative competence in the workplace. What is it? How does one acquire it? What if your family speaks only your language and you have no use for English outside of work? What if you live in a country that speaks English with a very different accent from the one you are attempting to learn? (like India or Jamaica).
There are a whole range of ways to address this issue that really don't differ in method from the standard way of approaching accent: first analyze speech, then create solutions that address systematic change, then implement them, then measure the results, then start all over again with "lessons learned" in mind.
Perhaps the bigger struggle is gaining corporate trust in offering this type of training. Without a history of past successes, it isn't likely to catch on or be easy to promote. It's much easier to apply a band-aid fix that everyone is familiar with. I remain optimistic and plan to focus on how to implement change, perhaps by taking "baby steps" to migrate gradually away from accent training to some degree, if only in mentality and focus, by including more application and exercise of learned concepts.
Currently I'm experimenting with an Indian audience to see how they react to communicative competence training. Details to follow ...
The interesting part is that getting from here to there isn't readily obvious to any of the stakeholders, not to educators, not to their intended audience and not to the companies that may be paying for softskills training.
There is no dearth of approaches to the problem: ignorance/denial (don't think about it and maybe it will go away ), traditional grammar & ESL classrooms, throw the non-native speakers in general communication with everyone else and hope they can figure out what words like "tonality" and "vocal variety" really mean ... huh??? or perhaps give them American Accent training because they aren't easy to understand.
The real answer is in exploring how to address communicative competence in the workplace. What is it? How does one acquire it? What if your family speaks only your language and you have no use for English outside of work? What if you live in a country that speaks English with a very different accent from the one you are attempting to learn? (like India or Jamaica).
There are a whole range of ways to address this issue that really don't differ in method from the standard way of approaching accent: first analyze speech, then create solutions that address systematic change, then implement them, then measure the results, then start all over again with "lessons learned" in mind.
Perhaps the bigger struggle is gaining corporate trust in offering this type of training. Without a history of past successes, it isn't likely to catch on or be easy to promote. It's much easier to apply a band-aid fix that everyone is familiar with. I remain optimistic and plan to focus on how to implement change, perhaps by taking "baby steps" to migrate gradually away from accent training to some degree, if only in mentality and focus, by including more application and exercise of learned concepts.
Currently I'm experimenting with an Indian audience to see how they react to communicative competence training. Details to follow ...
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
A New Day in Accent Training
So much has changed since the early days of Accent Training when Speech Therapists focused on "correcting" a foreign accent. Issues of identity, diversity, discrimination, and advancements in technology ( to name a few ) have changed the playing field, creating a free and open highway, alongside a field of landmines.
Among the challenges:
Among the challenges:
- Cost-effectiveness - no one wants to pay for something that doesn't work or takes forever to work ( as can be the case with traditional English tutoring, for example)
- Not offending anyone - how do organizations approach people suggest they need to change their accents - or do they?
- Determining what to spend the budget on - competing with other softskills training such as team building or "effective communication"
- Discrimination - singling out non-native speakers as needing something "additional" that others don't need or somehow suggesting they are lacking or not good enough
- The social stigma attached - many non-native speakers seek out this training on their own, yet don't want anyone to know about it - what causes this mentality and we can do anything about it?
- Technology - how do we embrace the latest technology and make it "soar" rather than "stumble" in the pursuit of accent correction.
One of the biggest challenges for me is time management. When I'm meeting with clients online in different countries and juggling time schedules as well as doing corporate work and working with individuals at times, it can become a challenge to stay focused and directed, even with organizational tools like web-calendars. Sometimes it feels like there are too many tools, creating another layer of frustration.
Personally I have not experienced clients feeling imposed upon by the idea of "American Accent Training" - most of them are willing and eager and actively seeking it out! Much of that is my approach of letting them "self-select" and come to me, but the question of growing a business and doing more corporate work adds a layer of complexity. What if those making the decision to offer the training to others aren't taking into consideration how "personal" this type of training is?
In pondering this, I realize that the initial meeting with a client provides the opportunity to "test to the waters" and insure the training is right, but in a group setting, it can be more challenging. Cultural faux pas (plural) do happen, and when they do, they are be challenging to address - especially in the virtual world.
I'll continue to ponder the subject, and please feel free to comment on the new day in accent training.
Monday, July 6, 2009
Far beyond "pronunciation" ...
A lot of people think accent is all about pronunciation, but beyond all of the elements that make up an accent (like word stress and intonation), there's also the concept of "communicative competence." Those of us who studied TESOL know that this concept has 4 components: 1) grammatical competence, 2) socio-linguistic, 3)discourse, and 4) strategic.
For non-native speakers who have lived in the US for many years, this is less of an issue, and it truly is about "accent," that is speaking clearly in terms of the traditional components that make up an accent, but for those living in other countries, the concept of "communicative competence" takes precedence.
Especially in countries where English is learned at a young age, yet the majority don't use English socially or in informal conversation, like India, communicative competence is a major concern. In fact, a good accent can mask other issues ( such as limited comprehension), leading a listener to think the "interlocutor" (or speech partner)understood, when in fact, s/he did not ( or perhaps not completely).
The broader issue is whether or not communicative competence can be achieved if the non-native speaker does not come to live in an English speaking country (like the US) for a period of time. The question becomes "Is communicative competence teachable?" Some people learn better (and faster) than others, and obviously factors like age ( younger people tend to learn faster ) and exposure (like immersion programs) can mimic actually living in another country, but how does one learn to be "communicatively competent." Is it just too broad? Wouldn't it take a lifetime?
The other issue is measurability. How can we judge how communicatively competent someone is? Do we develop a "test" they can take and how do you compare the end results to where they started from? An unbiased third-party native speaker will, in all likelihood, be able to notice the difference in terms of their comfort level talking to the person, but is that a valid way to judge? And if it is, think of how time consuming the process to measure it could be, having multiple native speakers talking to each person for an extended period of time in an effort to discern what they can or cannot understand and respond intelligibly (and appropriately) to in natural conversation.
And realistically, would anyone be willing to invest in such a service? Isn't it just easier to send people to live in the target country where the language is spoken for some period of time prior to expecting the employee to perform with communicative competence when addressing those from that culture? It appears that as all-consuming as communicative competence is, it would also change substantially depending on the culture the target language is spoken in, implying that to work in a BPO in India successfully, one would have to be "communicatively competent" in British, American & Australian English, just to name a few.
Although fraught with difficulties in implementation and evaluation, at least we can begin to see that this concept of "communicative competence" extends far beyond pronunciation so that modifying an accent, while desirable in some cases, is only scratching the surface of the wider global issue of communicating in culturally appropriate and effective ways that allow everyone to resolve issues and conduct business successfully around the world.
For non-native speakers who have lived in the US for many years, this is less of an issue, and it truly is about "accent," that is speaking clearly in terms of the traditional components that make up an accent, but for those living in other countries, the concept of "communicative competence" takes precedence.
Especially in countries where English is learned at a young age, yet the majority don't use English socially or in informal conversation, like India, communicative competence is a major concern. In fact, a good accent can mask other issues ( such as limited comprehension), leading a listener to think the "interlocutor" (or speech partner)understood, when in fact, s/he did not ( or perhaps not completely).
The broader issue is whether or not communicative competence can be achieved if the non-native speaker does not come to live in an English speaking country (like the US) for a period of time. The question becomes "Is communicative competence teachable?" Some people learn better (and faster) than others, and obviously factors like age ( younger people tend to learn faster ) and exposure (like immersion programs) can mimic actually living in another country, but how does one learn to be "communicatively competent." Is it just too broad? Wouldn't it take a lifetime?
The other issue is measurability. How can we judge how communicatively competent someone is? Do we develop a "test" they can take and how do you compare the end results to where they started from? An unbiased third-party native speaker will, in all likelihood, be able to notice the difference in terms of their comfort level talking to the person, but is that a valid way to judge? And if it is, think of how time consuming the process to measure it could be, having multiple native speakers talking to each person for an extended period of time in an effort to discern what they can or cannot understand and respond intelligibly (and appropriately) to in natural conversation.
And realistically, would anyone be willing to invest in such a service? Isn't it just easier to send people to live in the target country where the language is spoken for some period of time prior to expecting the employee to perform with communicative competence when addressing those from that culture? It appears that as all-consuming as communicative competence is, it would also change substantially depending on the culture the target language is spoken in, implying that to work in a BPO in India successfully, one would have to be "communicatively competent" in British, American & Australian English, just to name a few.
Although fraught with difficulties in implementation and evaluation, at least we can begin to see that this concept of "communicative competence" extends far beyond pronunciation so that modifying an accent, while desirable in some cases, is only scratching the surface of the wider global issue of communicating in culturally appropriate and effective ways that allow everyone to resolve issues and conduct business successfully around the world.
Sunday, July 5, 2009
What is a "Neutral" Accent?
I recently returned from a trip to India to explore the BPOs (that's "Business Process Outsourcing" for anyone new to the lingo), and met with a number of professionals (or at least people with an interest in either 1) accent training or 2) call centers or maybe 3) making money) ... in any case, they brought up the issue of acquiring a "neutral" accent, and it raised the intriguing question ... what IS a neutral accent and can it be acquired?
Most of us (including linguists, but probably anyone who takes time to think about the question) would agree that each of us has an accent. We could get into dialects like midwestern/southern/eastern accents (let's not), but even if we look at "world english" as a lingua franca, we all have accents - you can check them out on You Tube. Amy Walker is a great example of someone who has mastered 21 of them: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UgpfSp2t6k
The question is how do we (the collective "we" worldwide) determine what a neutral accent is? My first response as a native American English speaker is to dispense with the /ae/ sound as in "apple" and let it sound more like an /a/ as in "honest" and to let the /r/ sound after the vowel soften and disappear, all the while not paying attention to where the mouth control comes from: (lips vs. jaw) and just let it happen.
The next question, though, is a little tougher, and that is: what role does vocabulary or word usage play in accent? The verbiage we use makes a difference in determining where we are from, and it's challenging to choose what verbiage to use.
When I was in India, they talked about "hill stations," which I could grasp the intent of (both from Hindi-only movies of people driving through mountainous regions and my own experiences of being taken to a "hill station" that was a hotel on top of a mountain), but I didn't know the exact translation. I found it referenced on several internet resources as either "a town at a higher elevation" (I don't think we have a term for that in the US), or a "mountain resort" - that I intuitively "get." The interesting take-away in terms of a "neutral" accent, however, is that if someone used this word, I wouldn't consider that person to be speaking in a neutral way. It sounds foreign to me, so perhaps "neutral" implies using only words that don't change in different cultures ... leaving us to ponder who is going to create such a list or resource. Last time I checked, it wasn't on the Webster's, Longman's or Oxford's resource list, and IF someone did create it, would anyone take it seriously?
In India in particular, of course, it makes sense to strive to find a "neutral" accent because the goal is not to teach people English ... (they already speak it), but rather to help BPO associates on the phones communicate with people in other English-speaking countries: Austalia, New Zealand, England, and of course, the US, as well as in all regions where accents differ. It's understandable, then, that a "neutral" accent is desirable - if we define it as one that any English speaker can understand in any one of these countries - but who's going to determine what that accent is (and is not) in a way that it can be easily and certifiably created and sustained? Is it even possible?
Comments welcomed!
Most of us (including linguists, but probably anyone who takes time to think about the question) would agree that each of us has an accent. We could get into dialects like midwestern/southern/eastern accents (let's not), but even if we look at "world english" as a lingua franca, we all have accents - you can check them out on You Tube. Amy Walker is a great example of someone who has mastered 21 of them: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UgpfSp2t6k
The question is how do we (the collective "we" worldwide) determine what a neutral accent is? My first response as a native American English speaker is to dispense with the /ae/ sound as in "apple" and let it sound more like an /a/ as in "honest" and to let the /r/ sound after the vowel soften and disappear, all the while not paying attention to where the mouth control comes from: (lips vs. jaw) and just let it happen.
The next question, though, is a little tougher, and that is: what role does vocabulary or word usage play in accent? The verbiage we use makes a difference in determining where we are from, and it's challenging to choose what verbiage to use.
When I was in India, they talked about "hill stations," which I could grasp the intent of (both from Hindi-only movies of people driving through mountainous regions and my own experiences of being taken to a "hill station" that was a hotel on top of a mountain), but I didn't know the exact translation. I found it referenced on several internet resources as either "a town at a higher elevation" (I don't think we have a term for that in the US), or a "mountain resort" - that I intuitively "get." The interesting take-away in terms of a "neutral" accent, however, is that if someone used this word, I wouldn't consider that person to be speaking in a neutral way. It sounds foreign to me, so perhaps "neutral" implies using only words that don't change in different cultures ... leaving us to ponder who is going to create such a list or resource. Last time I checked, it wasn't on the Webster's, Longman's or Oxford's resource list, and IF someone did create it, would anyone take it seriously?
In India in particular, of course, it makes sense to strive to find a "neutral" accent because the goal is not to teach people English ... (they already speak it), but rather to help BPO associates on the phones communicate with people in other English-speaking countries: Austalia, New Zealand, England, and of course, the US, as well as in all regions where accents differ. It's understandable, then, that a "neutral" accent is desirable - if we define it as one that any English speaker can understand in any one of these countries - but who's going to determine what that accent is (and is not) in a way that it can be easily and certifiably created and sustained? Is it even possible?
Comments welcomed!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
