1. Chapter 3: The variation problem 2: Intra-speaker variation
J. Jenkins The phonology of English as an international language
Presented by: Melissa Aponte
Awilda Martinez

2. Accronyms IL – International Language
NBE’s – Non Bilingual English Speakers
FT – Foreigner Talk
EFL – English as a Foreign Language
ILT – International Language Transfer
ELT – English Language Transfer
EIL – English as an International Language

3. Introduction
Intra-speaker variation is generally interpreted as variation in correctness.
In terms of L2 spoken English, variation equals error.
The entire EFL endeavour is directed towards the standardizing of learner’s speech to bring it in line with an imagined STANDARD.

4. Intra-speaker variation
Intra-speaker variation- Variation ’within’ a speaker. Every human being can use his language in more than one way.
Speakers converge towards or diverge from the speech of their interlocutors.

5. “Standard English”
Represents an idealized abstraction far removed from the realities of the diversified and variable data of everyday interaction.(p.53)
Teaching EFL is directed towards the standardizing the learners’ speech to bring it in line with an imagined L1 standard. (p.53)
Teachers are trained to present in some more student oriented way, a new linguistic item, be it grammatical or lexical, and then to standardized.

6. “Standard English”
Brown states that in real life “acceptable English” is remarkably variable in speech and still more at the phonological level.
It is of more use for the L2 learner of English to have the ability to adjust their language in both style and level of accuracy in response to the particular set of circumstances in which an interaction is taking place.

7. L1 and IL intra-speaker variation: a distinction
All international languages are natural languages and, like all natural languages, dynamic rather than static. (p.54)
They are subject to various influences which can lead to systematic language variation.
First languages vary systematically along sociological and situational parameters.

8. L1 and IL intra-speaker variation: a distinction
Learners vary their languages in ways not found in either the L1 or L2.
IL variation advanced levels of proficiency is characterized by more variability in the production of linguistic “error”.
Variability is more prevalent in ILs than in L1s.
Tarone distinguishes between L1 and IL variation in terms of style-shifting and register-shifting.(p.55)

9. Style-shifting vs. Register-shifting according to Tarone
Style-shifting- is the ability to shift between more and less colloquial styles (e.g., interlocutor-related, setting-related, topic-related).
Register-shifting - is the sociolinguistic ability to speak casually in casual situations, or formally in formal situations (e.g. train vs. choo-choo, sodium chloride vs. salt, child vs. kid, etc.)

10. Style-shifting vs. Register-shifting according to the sociolinguistics
Style-shifting – is referred to the level of speech formality.
Register – describes the language specific to particular domains, such as occupational and interest groups.

11. Differences between ILs and L1s
Second language learners may learn only one register of the target language, and still style-shift within that register in the sense of paying greater or lesser attention to speech.
Educated L1 speakers of English make grammar “errors” in their speech.
L1 speakers, even in formal situations such as lectures, make grammatical slips in areas like subject/verb agreement.

12. Phonological intra-speaker variation and its effects on interlanguage talk
Limitations to obtain phonological convergence
Repertoire problem
IL Pronunciation – these are rarely the subject, and never the goal of teaching.
Psychological fear of acquiring peer group pronunciation errors (commonly found in multilingual classes).

13. Transfer Replacement Process
FOREIGN TALK-form of convergence
MAIN FACTORS FOR TRANSFER REPLACEMENT PROCESS
The type of transfer involved.
The amount of attention the speaker was able to give to replacing transfer rather than planning content.
The salience of interlocutor comprehension at any given point in the interaction.

14. Convergence through Transfer Replacement
The type of convergence (by replacement of transfer) which has been identified and claimed in ILT involves the making of adjustments according to the needs of the receiver, and not merely an attempt at indiscriminate reduction of phonological (transfer) error.

15. MAIN IMPLICATIONS FOR EIL PRONUNCIATION PEDAGOGY
It is needed to get to grips with the nature of intelligibility.
It will be important to identify contrived norms based on a subject to core EIL phonology features.
We must devise methods for classroom pedagogy which build on the instinctive desire to NBESs to accommodate phonologically to their interlocutors in ILT speech situations.

16. Conclusions
Although language variation away from “the standard” is viewed by many people very negatively, it has been observed that L2 variation is very often the result of an attempt to produce pronunciation that is intelligible for the particular interlocutor, according to the interlocutor’s pronunciation features involved.
It appears to be that it is the lack of convergent behaviour what threatens successful communication in ILT.