English Pronunciation Models in the Dialogue of Cultures: Attitudes and Concerns in Teacher Education in Russia

Authors

  • Elena L. Freydina
  • Margarita Yu. Seiranyan
  • Galina S. Abramova

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18485/analiff.2022.34.1.4

Keywords:

pronunciation, English as a Foreign Language (EFL), English as a Lingua Franca (ELF), learners' attitudes, teacher education

Abstract

The global spread of English has resulted in a change in priorities with regards to pronunciation. The “English as a Lingua Franca” model has taken the dominant position worldwide. However, there is little consensus among researchers and practitioners on which pronunciation model, English as a Foreign Language (EFL) or English as a Lingua Franca (ELF), should be applied in teacher education. This study investigates the attitudes to EFL and ELF pronunciation models amongst participants in teacher education in Russia (students and lecturers of the Institute of Foreign Languages, Moscow State Pedagogical University). The study was mixed-method, quantitative and qualitative: the quantitative data were processed by means of descriptive statistics, and for the analysis of qualitative data, content analysis was applied. It involved one hundred and twenty-two students answering the questionnaire and twenty university lecturers responding to semi-structured interview questions. The results show that both students and lecturers would prefer the EFL model to be used in pronunciation instruction in the course of professional teacher education. From the pedagogical perspective, the key findings demonstrate that a balanced combination of the traditional EFL approach and ELF awareness may enhance the quality of pronunciation teaching in teacher education programmes in Russia.

Downloads

Published

2022-06-08

How to Cite

Freydina, E. L., Seiranyan, M. Y. ., & Abramova, G. S. . (2022). English Pronunciation Models in the Dialogue of Cultures: Attitudes and Concerns in Teacher Education in Russia. Annals of the Faculty of Philology, 34(1), 59–72. https://doi.org/10.18485/analiff.2022.34.1.4