Foreign accent:

Why do adult language learners speak with an

accent?
What are the consequences for teaching
pronunciation?

It is not possible to identify someone as a non-native speaker of a

language simply by his or her appearance. However in most cases it
is possible to identify people who learned their second language as an
adult by their pronunciation. This is because almost all adult
language learners speak the new language with a foreign accent.
This in itself is an interesting phenomenon, but what makes it even
more fascinating is that generally speaking, children are eventually
able to produce native-like speech. Why does this happen? Attempts
have been made to answer this question in various ways over the last
few decades, as many researchers believe that the occurrence of
accents is symptomatic of the fundamental differences in the way
that children and adults learn languages. Human language and the
way that it is acquired is incredibly complex, involving the interplay of
many processes and so it is very difficult to try and isolate the source
of foreign accent, or even in fact to assume that there is a single
cause. For this reason explanations have evolved from a variety of
viewpoints. Understanding the reasons for the occurrence of foreign
accent has significant implications for TESOL. By giving each
consideration we can make decisions about the relevance of teaching
pronunciation and which teaching methods are most effective.

In the 1960s a theory began to emerge that there is in fact a

neurologically based ‘critical period’ for acquiring a first language and
that beyond this period there are changes that occur that make it
difficult to learn language. This idea became known as the ‘critical
period hypothesis’ (CPH). Penfield and Roberts (1959) first mentioned
that a “loss in plasticity” occurs around the age of twelve, in the areas
of the brain responsible for language learning, and Lenneberg (1967)
continued with this idea, stating more specifically that it is the
process of cerebral lateralisation, where the two hemispheres of the
brain become specialized, that results in the loss of plasticity. His
evidence to support this claim came from studies of children and
adults who had suffered similar brain injuries that affected areas
responsible for speech. He found that children were able to recover
from such injuries with no impairment to their speech while this was
not the case for adults. He suggested that this was because the
hemispheres of children’s brains are not yet specialized and so if the
left side was damaged through injury or an operation, the right side
could assume those responsibilities.

Subsequent research into the validity of this hypothesis, brought into

question the exact age at which laterisation occurs and is completed.
Penfield and Roberts (1959) suggested that this occurred at the onset
of puberty, while Krashen (1973) believed that it may be complete by
the age of five. A further problem is that it would be assumed that
once an age had been established for the completion of laterisation
then there would be a marked discontinuity in language learning
ability. As Flege (1987) points out there is no such mark at any age,
instead it can be seen that there is in fact a linear decline over time in
person’s ability, particularly for pronunciation.

There have been many criticisms about the inadequacies of this

hypothesis, but perhaps the most important point to consider, which
is sometimes overlooked, is the fact that right from the beginning
there has never been any direct evidence that laterisation impairs L2
ability.

It has also been suggested that a focus on such a specific neurological

explanation, does not allow for many other factors which could
equally be playing a role in determining how well language is acquired
or as Flege (1987) suggests, could be confounding the true source.
One such confounding factor, also of a neurological nature, could be
psychomotor development. Speech requires the movement and
coordination of so many muscles, an ability that children develop over
time, just as they learn to walk, throw a ball and use a pencil.
Following this thought, most people have probably noticed, and as
Brown (1987) points out, those who develop outstanding abilities in
areas that require a high level of muscular dexterity, such as playing
a musical instrument, dancing and sports, have usually begun
learning these skills at a young age. Therefore, it is quite logical to
conclude that as different languages require different muscular
movements to produce the sounds unique to that language, it is more
difficult to “train” these muscles as an adult. Flege (1980) also
supports this theory using studies that intend to simulate adult L2
phonology learning. These studies found that L2 sounds which also
occurred in L2 were easier to produce than those that never occurred.
He concluded from this that in order to pronounce L2 accurately, the
language learner must acquire completely new articulatory gestures,
or modify existing gestures to the point that they mimic those of the
L2, so that they are automatic. It seems that this is easier for children
to do while they are still in the process of developing the phonetic
patterns of their first language.

Pennington and Richards (1986) also acknowledge that pronunciation

problems can be psychomotor, however they caution against
attributing foreign accent to a single source due to the fact that the
development of L2 phonology is a dynamic process involving the
interaction of many different factors including neurological, affective,
interactive and linguistic factors. One such linguistic factor has been
discussed by Flege (1981). At this time he presented a hypothesis
that the ability to learn a language does not in fact diminish with age.
Rather he argues that beyond a certain age a person has established
such stable phonological representations for the sounds in their native
language that when they hear words in the foreign language, they
perceive the sounds that are similar to their native language sounds
as identical. So instead of creating an entirely new acoustic model,
language learners actually “translate” the sounds they hear, pairing
them with sounds of the acoustic model of their first language. For
this reason Flege calls it the “phonological translation hypothesis”.
The problem of course is that the sounds are similar not identical and
so when speaking the target language it is done so with an accent.
A further area of consideration that opens up a broad range of
possible explanations for why accents occur in adults, the degree to
which they occur and why they are retained, is the affective domain.
Ellis (1985) explains Guoira’s idea that the affective domain and
language development are inextricably linked due to the way in which
people use their language to help define their own identity. The way
we view ourselves is based upon interactions with others around us.
Feedback that we receive from what we say and do, constantly
reshapes our own self image or ego. This is significant when
comparing language learning in children and adults, because the
affective state of an individual undergoes enormous change with age.
As a child, the ego is more flexible as it is constantly being adjusted
and altered as he or she becomes more aware of the surrounding
environment. For this reason it would seem that a child has less
inhibitions in accommodating a second language than an adult, as
they are already willing to take risks and experiment in acquiring their
first language, therefore the second language does not present as a
threat.

As mentioned, children shape their self-image from feedback in

interactions with others around them. There is another interesting
aspect to this process that Brown (1987) addresses, which is the way
that children are much more critical of each others language than are
adults. If a child produces speech with an accent, other children
notice immediately and do not refrain from pointing it out as a defect.
In contrast adults are much more likely to give positive
encouragement to a language learner who is able to communicate
their ideas successfully, regardless of the accuracy of their
pronunciation. In this way children may feel much greater social
pressure to acquire native-like speech, and so dedicate much more
effort to doing so.

There may also be a factor that is compounding this contrast in

foreign accent in adults and children. Foreign accents are often
viewed as a detrimental condition in second language learning
because it may make speech more difficult to understand and could
influence the listener to make negative judgements about the speaker
due to their ethnicity. However Flege (1987) points out that there
may actually be reasons why people who are living in the community
of the L2 may consciously wish to retain their accent. Somebody who
does not identify themselves as a member of the L2 community and
wishes to preserve their ethnic identity might deliberately maintain
their accent. Perhaps this may be due to a fear that they will be seen
as a traitor by the ethnic community to which they belong. Another
possible reason for deliberately maintaining an accent is that
foreigners are often excused for social blunders, and so their accent
provides a ready-made excuse.

The feeling of needing an excuse for errors in the second language is

indicative of the way that adults are much more afraid of making
mistakes than children. As mentioned earlier, children are still
acquiring their first language and so they are more willing to take
risks, without perhaps even realising it. Adults however are very self-
conscious of their own performance especially when it comes to
pronunciation. Krashen (1997) has produced a very interesting
conjecture, that we actually do possess the ability to speak with an
authentic accent, however with are so afraid of sounding silly and
making a fool of ourselves that an “output filter” is raised that
prevents us from doing so. He used an example from his own
experience where he was in a meeting, discussing an issue in French
with a group of people he was comfortable with. He was confident
about his French pronunciation, however when a stranger entered the
room who he thought might be a native speaker of French, he could
hear the quality of his pronunciation rapidly diminishing beyond his
control.

A further problem that adults face in regard to the way in which they
perceive their learning and second language ability, is
competitiveness that can be detrimental. Bailey (1983), conducted a
study based on diary entries from which she concluded that when a
learner feels that their ability is less than others around them,
especially in a classroom situation, it may produce high levels of
anxiety and defensiveness, which do not produce an ideal state for
learning.

The type of input that a learner receives has proven to be of

significant importance for the second language learner in every
aspect of language learning, including pronunciation as described by
Celce-Murcia, Brinton and Goodwin (1996). This presents a problem
for adults because the input that adults tend to receive is quite often
different from that of a child, especially when looking at learners who
are living as immigrants within the L2 community. It is quite common
for immigrants to surround themselves in their new country with
members of the same ethnic group. In Australia it is possible to see
what are sometimes described as ethnic “enclaves”, in which many of
an immigrant’s neighbors, local business operators, and sometimes
co-workers are of the same ethnic community (or at least other non-
native speakers) and so for many day to day activities it is not
necessary for them to speak English. Adults tend to spend more time
within this enclave than children, as children must attend school, and
through doing so have a greater exposure to the L2 from native
speakers. With less exposure to quality L2 input, adults are clearly at
a disadvantage to acquire accurate pronunciation. To compound this
problem, adults are often spoken to in a more abstract way, whereas
language is often simplified and used in reference to objects or event
close at hand for children. As Ellis (1985) and others argue it is
essential for learners to receive comprehensible input in order for
acquisition to occur.

Explanations for foreign accents are so numerous it is not possible to

describe them all here, and that is not the intent of this essay. Much
more could be said about the role of the first language, the types of
motivation that people have to pronounce L2 well, aptitude for
pronouncing foreign languages and in fact for each area already
covered. Nonetheless, the theories and research presented here are
sufficient to say that many factors contribute to the existence of
foreign accent and that many of these are beyond the control of
formal instruction. Does this mean that teaching pronunciation in a
classroom setting is a waste of time? Perhaps not, as many theorists
are now suggesting that if methodology in teaching pronunciation
takes into considerations the reasons why accents occur it is indeed
possible to help students of an L2 to improve their pronunciation to
some degree at any age. Acton (1984) suggests that even
pronunciation which has been classified as fossilized can be improved
if the right teaching techniques are used.

Appropriate and realistic long term goal setting is now considered a

fundamental aspect of preparing to teach pronunciation, both for the
teacher and the student. Clearly, to acquire a native-like accent is
not a realistic goal for students, especially adults, and so Pennington
and Richards (1986) suggest that students should be encouraged to
aim to produce intelligible speech, and to help them improve their
self-confidence and their image of themselves as a speaker of L2.

Methodology for teaching pronunciation must consider the way in

which the student learns best. As Celce-Murcia, Brinton and Goodwin
(1996) point out, focusing on the segmental level of pronunciation is
not helpful as even high proficiency at this level does not produce
native-like speech. Rather, the focus should be shifted towards the
way in which the segmental features interact with the
suprasegmentals and other aspects of pronunciation such as voice
quality, intonation and rhythm.

In order to show how these aspects are interdependent and to help

students to produce them accurately it is essential that classes are
interactive, and that they occur within meaningful communicative
settings. It is not possible for students to recognize and produce
accurate and meaningful speech in a vacuum. There must be clear
purpose and application for what is being acquired.

The affective factors which are influencing a student’s learning must

also be addressed. Some students feel that it is not possible for their
pronunciation to improve, they may feel ashamed of how they sound,
or perhaps they don’t see the need to or don’t want to improve. As
mentioned earlier these affective factors can be significant barriers to
learning pronunciation. That is why Acton (1984) emphasizes that
teachers have a responsibility to help students change the mind-sets
that they may have developed about their accents. Students should
be led to understand that it is possible to improve and that in doing so
they will be more easily understood which in turn, can reduce their
anxiety and self consciousness.

Another problem that some students have, and that teachers can help
them with, is when they do not realize that they are making a
pronunciation error. Acton (1984) suggests that helping students
recognize their errors and helping them to develop a self-monitoring
system that they can take with them beyond the classroom can be a
significant step towards improving the quality of their pronunciation.

It is also important that the teacher makes clear the interdependence

of pronunciation and listening. This concurs with the ideas of
Penington and Richards (1986) who see the importance of including
listening comprehension as a key element of teaching pronunciation.
Ideally listening comprehension should form a part of discourse based
communicative practices in order that intelligible pronunciation is
developed.

What must also be considered by the teacher is the exact contents of

the pronunciation syllabus. The phonetic aspect of language is so
complex that it is not possible to assign class time to teaching every
indivual pronunciation point. For this reason it is essential that a
teacher is selective and can justify the choice that he or she makes.
Celce-Murcia, Brinton and Goodwin (1996) suggest that the best way
to make these choices are to consider the needs of the particular
learners at hand. Once these choices have been made, the methods
implemented to teach these aspects of pronunciation must enable the
students to recognize these in speech, produce them intelligibly
themselves, both in isolation and also spontaneously within a
communicative situation.
In their study on the predictors of pronunciation accuracy, Purcell and
Suter (1980) conclude that he most powerful determiners of the
degree of foreign accent are those that the teacher has little or no
influence upon and that “the attainment of accurate pronunciation is
a matter substantially beyond the control of educators”. Whilst it is
true that factors such as a learner’s linguistic background,
psychological state, innate ability and motivation upon entering the
classroom are unpredictable, it is possible for pronunciation to
improve. This can happen, provided that the teacher is committed to
helping students to change their attitudes, motivating them, providing
meaningful and communicative learning experiences and helping the
students to develop a self monitoring system so that they can
continue improving beyond the classroom. Finally, it is important for
both students and teachers to put the importance of pronunciation
into perspective, as sometimes accent is judged too quickly. Provided
that speech is clear and intelligible, who is to say that native-like
pronunciation is the most important indicator of L2 proficiency?
Brown (1987) demonstrates perfectly that this is not the case by
giving the example of Henry Kissinger, the former US Secretary of
State, who despite his obvious German accent clearly demonstrated
that he had a command of English that was far more sophisticated
than many native-speaker Americans of that time. Effective
communication is surely more important.

REFERENCES

Acton, W. (1984). ‘Changing Fossilized Pronunciation’. TESOL

Quarterly 18(1): 69-83

Bailey, K. (1983). ‘Competitiveness and Anxiety in Adult Second

Language Learning.’ in Brown, D. (1995). Readings on Second
Language Acquisition. Prentice-Hall Inc. New Jersey.

Brown, D. (1987). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching (2nd

ed.). Prentice-Hall Inc. New Jersey.

Celce-Murcia, M., Brinton, D.M. & Goodwin, J.M. (1996). Teaching

Pronunciation, Cambridge University Press, New York.

Ellis, R. (1985). Understanding Second Language Acquisition. Oxford

University Press. Oxford.

Flege, J. (1980). ‘Phonetic Approximation in Second Language

Acquisition’. Language Learning 30 (1): 117-34

Flege, J. (1981). ‘The Phonological Basis of Foreign Accent: A

Hypothesis.’ TESOL Quarterly 15 (4): 443-55

Flege, J. (1987). ‘A Critical Period for Learning to Pronounce Foreign

Languages?’ Applied Linguistics 8: 162-177

Krashen, S. (1973). ‘Laterization, Language Learning, and the Critical

Period: Some New Evidence.’ Language Learning 23: 63-74

Krashen,S.(1997).
http://input.languagebooks.com/eduction/2.0/articles/Aconjecture3

Lenneberg, E. (1967). Biological Foundations of Language, Wiley, New

York.

Penfield, W. & Roberts, L. (1959). Speech and Brain Mechanisms.

Atheneum, New York.

Pennington, M. & Richards, J. (1986), ‘Pronunciation Revisited’, TESOL

Quarterly 20: 207-225.

Purcell, E. & Suter, R. (1980). ‘Predictors of Pronunciation Accuracy: A

Reexamnination.’ Language Learning 30(2): 271-287