AWARENESS OF WORLD ENGLISHES

OF VIETNAMESE USERS OF ENGLISH

Nguyn Quang Tin*

Introduction
Nowadays, the concept of 'English as a
lingual franca' is not strange to most linguists
and language practitioners. However, it is not
quite familiar to users of English, including
learners of English, and even some teachers of
English in some parts of the world, especially
where English is not a means of daily
communication. Ignorance of this concept leads
some people, especially learners of English, to
have different attitudes - often negative ones towards other world Englishes as well as people
who speak those varieties. This problem cannot
be said to be non-existent in Vietnam, a country
which belongs to the expanding circle where
English is not spoken as the mother tongue
(Kachru, 1982). In order to get a general view
of how this problem occurs in Vietnam, an
understanding of the history of the foreign
language education there is necessary. This
background information is the foundation upon
which the study presented in this paper was built
to investigate the awareness of world Englishes
of 17 Vietnamese students who were studying
in the Philippines. The study is anchored to the
following concepts: Standard English and the
decline of this concept, the widespread use of
English today, ownership of English, and

intelligibility.
Historical view of the foreign language
education in Vietnam
The language education in Vietnam from
1945 to 1975
Like some other countries in the region,
Vietnam was in the war against the French and
the Americans. Those political realities have had
effects on the use of languages, and particularly
on foreign language education in Vietnam
(Dang, 2004). From 1858 to 1954 when the
French colonized Vietnam, French was dominant
and the Vietnamese spoke both Vietnamese and
French on a daily basis. In the long run, the
French colonialists took steps to force
Vietnamese people to learn and speak French
so as to meet the demands of their administration
(ibid.). So French became the main medium of
instruction at school within the French
educational system. In South Vietnam, it was
the first foreign language up to 1954 (Nguyen
& Crabbe, 1999) (Table 1).
In 1945, after the victory of Dien Bien Phu
in North Vietnam, the Geneva Agreement was
signed, ending the French colonialists'
domination in Vietnam. Then Vietnam was
temporarily divided into two separated areas North and South - with two different political

* NCS, Chuyn nganh Ng vn Anh, H Ateneo de Manila, Philippines.

K H O A H O C X A H O I V A N H A N V A N 69

institutions: the North under the Democratic

Republic of Vietnam (DRVN), and the South
under the Republic of Vietnam (RVN). At this
time, foreign language education in the North
and that in the South were developed in distinct
ways (Dang 2004). North Vietnam, aided by the
Soviet Union, China, and other socialist
countries in many sectors such as education, and
economic development, promoted the teaching
of the Russian language and the Chinese
language, particularly at high schools and
universities. Many Vietnamese scholars were
sent to the Soviet Union to study. For the local
language, Vietnamese was the medium of
instruction at all educational levels. In contrast,
considered "the enemy's language"1, English was
not used on a daily basis. It was used only at
some selected international conferences, and
occasionally in diplomacy and foreign trade.
Being in a long period of fighting against foreign
invasion, Northerners equated foreign
languages, particularly English, as foreign
intervention and related it to American
imperialism (Dang, 2004). Consequently,
English was the least promoted and 'neglected'
in North Vietnam; and English majors found it
difficult to get a job after graduation. By 1956,
the departments of Chinese, Russian, French,
and English had been established in Hanoi
Teacher Training College, but not many students
felt encouraged to study English due to the social
attitudes towards English.
While Russian and Chinese were taught in
North Vietnam after 1954, English and French
were taught in South Vietnam as required
subjects in secondary and tertiary education
because after 1954, the Americans came to South
Vietnam and colonized it until the reunification
of the country in 1975. When the economy,
military, and educational system in South
Vietnam were under the control of the
Americans, the use of English was extensively
promoted to meet the needs of the Southern
administration (Dang, 2004); the VietnamAmerican Association opened many
Vietnamese-American Centers to promote the

learning of the English language. By the mid

1960s, English started to become a more
dominant foreign language (FL) than French
(Patt, 1969). English learning came into vogue
after 1970; English language schools
mushroomed almost everywhere; hundreds of
thousands of learners began to learn English
which, by that time, became the main foreign
language taught in secondary and tertiary
education. In brief, American English was
popular then.
Though English began to gain its dominant
status in South Vietnam after 1975, the use of
the French language, which was 'deep-rooted'
at many social strata, was still influential in the
educational system, particularly in technical and
scientific training until 1965 for a variety of
reasons: 1) South Vietnam continued to receive
aid in political and economic aspects from the
French; 2) important posts in the government
and universities were still held by people with
French education; and 3) the French language
was still developed through the enhancement of
the Alliance Franaise, and a French school
system which had been strongly developed was
still in operation (Dang, 2004). Afterwards, it
seemed to be gradually out of use (Patt, 1969).
The language education in Vietnam from
1975 to 1980
The political event that Vietnam became reunified and entirely independent on April 30,
1975 again determined the languages spoken
throughout the country. In North Vietnam,
Russian continued to be a dominant foreign
language taught at secondary and tertiary
education since Vietnam was still politically,
economically, and educationally linked to and
aided by the Soviet Union in the Socialist bloc.
Thus, the use of Russian played an important
role in reinforcing this collaboration. In contrast,
English and French were considered subordinate
foreign languages in educational system (Le,
1997; Nguyen & Crabble, 1999).
After the national re-unification, a strong
anti-American movement broke out; and this
movement was promoted particularly in South

1. After 1954, while the North promoted Russian and Chinese since North Vietnam was within the Socialist bloc,
South Vietnam promoted English when the Americans occupied the South.

70K H O A H O C X A H O I V A N H A N V A N

Vietnam; all remnants of colonial and neocolonial culture and education were eradicated;
the Central Government strongly supported a
language policy which downplayed the study of
the two foreign languages - English and French
- and which restricted the use and spread of these
two languages (Dang, 2004); English and French
textbooks were burned (Do, 1996; Nguyen &
Kendall, 1981). In contrast, the Russian
language began to be promoted in South Vietnam
by the Soviet Union or Russian aid in education;
Russian departments, Russian sections, and
Russian Language Centers were formed in many
universities and all over South Vietnam. Though
English was put aside, it was not completely out
of use.
The language education in Vietnam from
1980s until now
Such a language policy caused the stagnation
of the national economy (Dang, 2004).
Therefore, a major shift in emphasis on foreign
language education policy was then made at the
Sixth National Congress of the Vietnamese
Communist Party (1986), which launched
'Open-Door' or 'Doi Moi' (renovation) policy
with the aim to expand the country's
international communication, particularly with
neighboring countries like Singapore, Thailand,
etc. This shift brought a remarkable milestone
of the practices of learning and teaching English
in Vietnam though English had became a
required subject in school settings, particularly
at tertiary level (Do, 1999; Nguyen & Crabbe,
1999); English training began to be in great

demand. From 1979 to 1985, a small number of

English language teachers were sent to Britain,
Australia, and India for language training, and
many English language training programs were
organized under the United Nations
Development Program (UNDP) Project. From
1985 to 1993, around 200 Vietnamese teachers
of English were sent to Australia for higher
education; and some others were sent to Britain
and India (Do, 1999); 'The Vietnam-Australia
English Language Technical Training Project
(VAT)', and Teacher In-service Education
Programs (TIE) were set up to develop the
English language skills of teachers and their
English language teaching skills (Brogan &
Nguyen, 1999).
Since most teachers were sent to Britain and
Australia for English teaching training, when
they came back to Vietnam, they promoted
British or Australian English. Aside from these
two varieties of English, American English was
also privileged since it was taught and used in
Vietnam, particularly South Vietnam, before.
Since then these three varieties of English have
been promoted in ELT since all textbooks, tapes,
and video tapes which are used for the learning
and teaching of English have been imported
mainly from two inner-circle countries - the
United States and Britain. Thus, most
Vietnamese people are just aware of these
varieties of Englishes, and they consider them
Standard English. Though Vietnam joined the
ASEAN in 1987 and became a full member of
ASEAN on 28 July 1995 (Do, 1999), most

Table 1 Political events and foreign language education policy in Vietnam

1858 - 1954
1954

French colonialism; Language education from 1958 - 1945: Vietnamese & French
Geneva Agreement was signed. Since then, Vietnam was temporarily divided into two:
NORTH:
The Democratic Republic of
Vietnam (DRVN)

SOUTH:
The Republic of Vietnam
(RVN)

1954 - 1975

Russian & Chinese: main foreign languages

English: 'enemy language' not promoted,

1975 - 1980

Russian: dominant language

English & French: subordinate

1980s - now

ENGLISH: a dominant foreign language in the whole country

French & English: main foreign

languages taught at school
Russian: begun to dominate
English & French: subordinate

K H O A H O C X A H O I V A N H A N V A N 71

Vietnamese' limited awareness of world

Englishes seems not to change.
Standard English
The questions "Whose English is the
standard?" and "Whose norms are to be
followed?" are frequently asked by English users
and learners of English and are likely to be
advocated when the inner circle countries assert
a dichotomy between the superior self and the
inferior other (Philippson, 1992; Pennycook,
1998). A critical look at the widespread use of
English helps answer these questions.
The widespread use of English today
Today many people are quite familiar with
the linguistic phenomenon of the widespread use
of English all over the world. Widely used,
English has been labeled as 'a lingua franca'
(Kirkpatrick, 2002; Oka, 2004; Phan, 2005;
Seidlhofer, 2005), and 'a global language'
(Crystal 2003; Phan, 2005). Many other terms
such as 'the world language', 'the language on
which the sun never sets', 'a universal language'
are also applicable. This phenomenon creates a
need to review the idea of 'native speaker' to see
whether it is any longer an appropriate term in
the current worldwide use of English.
When the use of English is limited in the
Inner Circle where English is spoken as the
mother tongue (Kachru, 1998, 2005), the term
'nativeness' makes sense in differentiating the
native speakers' use of English and that of people
in Outer Circle and Expanding Circle. But now
when the number of non-native speakers of
English in these two circles has been drastically
increasing, as Rajagopalan (2004) states, "the
whole idea of 'native speaker' has been rendered
somewhat blurred, if not hopelessly
meaningless." The current trend continues and
leads to the fact that there will be more nonnative than native-speakers (Rajagopalan, 2004).
Kachru (1982) shows that there are 266 million
native speakers and 115 million non-native
speakers. That is 33.1% of English speakers are
non-native users. This figure does not include
people enrolled in schools. Graddol's (1997)
survey indicates, 'the largest English speaking
nation, the USA, turns out to have only about
20% of the world's English speakers. Crystal
(1997) states that the use of English in the outer

circle has a much greater growth rate than that

of the inner circle: in 1995-6, an average of 2.3
per cent compared with 0.8 percent; and within
10 years, there will certainly be more L2
speakers than L1 speakers; and within 50 years,
there could be up to 50 per cent more. Crystal
(2003) restates his idea because roughly only
one out of every four users of English in the
world is a native speaker of English; most
English as a lingua franca interactions occur
among 'non-native' speakers of English.
Ownership of English
Since English is now used by people in all
the three circles - Inner, Outer, and Expanding,
it belongs to no particular culture, but belongs
to everyone who speaks it, i.e., it is nobody's
mother tongue (Rajagopalan, 2004). No one can
claim the sole ownership of the language
(Crystal, 1997). "Native speakers of English"
may feel uncomfortable with the loss of
ownership since they think that the language is
theirs by historical right; but actually they have
no alternative when no one can forbid others to
speak English. They might also think that their
language is at risk of being 'corrupted' or
'polluted' since it has been modified by its users
- in this case, more non-native speakers than
native speakers - and promoted everywhere
without control (Crystal 1988, cited in
Pennycook, 1994). This modification causes 'destandadization' (Graddol, 1997) which cannot
be controlled by native speakers of English.
The decline of 'standard English'
The aforementioned statistics make it easy
to understand that 'standard English' is now being
superseded by regional or local standard English
for the purposes of international communication
in English; what is called 'standard English' is
now in decline due to the widespread use of
English as a language of wider communication
(Graddol, 1997). Language teaching in general
and ELT in particular is historically premised
on the notion of the native speakers with
'standard English.' Now in the globalization in
which English has dramatically been used as a
lingua franca, that notion is no longer appropriate
since 'native speaker of English' is no longer a
model speaker of World English and they are
not thereby a privileged users of World English.

72K H O A H O C X A H O I V A N H A N V A N

Intelligibility
When the population of users of English is
larger than that in the USA, the UK, and Canada,
one of the most frequent concerns is the
possibility of intelligibility among speakers of
different varieties of English. According to
Smith and Nelson (2006), it is not the case that
every user of English is necessarily intelligible
to every other user of English; our
communication in English needs to be
intelligible to those with whom we wish to
communicate. For example, Indians who use
English frequently among themselves have felt
the need to communicate in English with one
another. So being intelligible in English to their
fellow countrymen, not to foreigners, is
necessary.
Understanding the concept of 'intelligibility'
When describing a language, one cannot
ignore its functions. Graddol (1997) states that
English has two main functions: a) it provides a
vehicular language for international
communication which requires two components
- namely, mutual intelligibility and common
standards; and b) it forms the basis for
constructing cultural identities. When English
has become a lingua franca, its two functions
need to get more attention from both its users
and English linguists.
First, the term 'intelligibility' needs to be
defined. According to Kachru (1982: 48), not
much attention from researchers has been given
to the concept of 'intelligibility,' thus, it has been
least understood in linguistic or pedagogical
literature. The difficulty understanding this
concept probably lies in its number of variables
and its elusion. Therefore, Kachru (1982)
suggests understanding this concept in a specific
sense by taking into consideration the following
points: intelligibility in reference to linguistic
level, and the relationship between intelligibility
of formal (linguistic) exponents and the
contextual exponents.
First, "intelligibility" has been understood in
a rather narrow sense in earlier studies in which
decoding a phonetic/ phonological signal at the
lexical level has been in focus. Users of English
often base on three variables, namely sounds,
accents, and pronunciation, to conclude that

one's English is more intelligible than others'.

The closer one's three variables are to others',
the more intelligible, they think, others' English
is. If we understand 'intelligibility' in this way, it
means that the concept 'intelligibility' is just
interpreted in a limited sense of linguistic level
and just defined in regional terms (Kachru,
1982: 49).
Smith and Nelson (2006) def ine
"intelligibility" in a broad sense with three
categories which make it accessible for
examination and analysis. The first category of
intelligible is word/ utterance recognition. The
more familiar speakers - native or non-native are to a variety of English, the more likely it is
that they will understand and be understood by
members of that speech community. This
familiarity just reaches the level of recognition
of linguistic elements such as sounds, accents,
pronunciation, words, and utterance. However,
successful communication in English is not
assured by these linguistic elements. Some
linguistic elements like utterances have pragmatic
effects which cannot be understood without
situational, social, and cultural awareness. Thus,
the last two categories of intelligibility required
for successful communication in English are
'comprehensibility', or word/ utterance meaning
(locutionary force) and 'interpretability', or
meaning behind word/ utterance (illocutionary
force) - the highest category. These three
categories - intelligibility, comprehensibility, and
interpretability - may be seen as degrees of
understanding on a continuum from simple
variables like phonology to complex ones like
pragmatics (Smith & Nelson, 2006).
In the context of English as a lingua franca
or an international language, the definition of
'intelligibility' cannot just be limited to linguistic
sense or the first category of 'intelligibility'
mentioned above, but it needs to be defined in
higher levels or higher categories - namely,
cultural level, discourse level, pragmatic level,
or functional level. That is to say, socio-linguistic
factors need to be taken into account to enhance
'intelligibility' in communication among users
of English (Canagarajah, 1999; Kachru, 1998;
Kirkpatrick, 2002; Smith & Nelson, 2006; Oka,
2004). At this point, 'intelligibility' is defined

K H O A H O C X A H O I V A N H A N V A N 73

in international term (Kachru, 1982) which

refers to cross-cultural communication. If a
certain culture shared among users of English
irrespective of their first language backgrounds,
intelligibility in their English communication
will be enhanced.
Equipped with the knowledge of the
relationship between linguistic and
sociolinguistic codes (Oka, 2004), the
intercultural communicator can function in the
global world and become a person with
"intellectual communicative competence' - a
person's ability to relate and communicate with
people who speak different languages and live
in different cultural contexts in which these
codes should not be limited to those of Britain
or North America, but should include those of
different countries with different varieties of
English.
The level of intelligibility is also influenced
by the familiarity with a) different varieties of
English; b) topic and speech variety; and c)
language proficiency of interlocutors - a factor
which seems to be the most important for
comprehensibility. Smith and Nelson's (2006)
study shows that it is strikingly surprising that
native speakers (from Britain and the United
States) were not found to be the most easily
understood, nor were they, as subjects, the best
able to understand the different varieties of
English. This finding illustrates the point that
"being a native speaker does not seem to be as
important as being fluent in English and familiar
with several different national varieties."
The investigation
Research questions
As a Vietnamese teacher of English, I am
curious about the extent to which Vietnamese
people are aware of World Englishes. The
conducted study attempts to answer the
following questions:
1. To what extent are Vietnamese students
aware of World Englishes?
2. What are their attitudes towards
intelligibility in World Englishes?
Methodology
At the time the study was conducted, the
author of this paper lived in the Philippines. That
is why the subjects of this study were Vietnamese

students studying in this country. Since it was

not easy to find and contact Vietnamese people
studying here, the study followed the qualitative
research design with a snowball sampling which
consists of 17 students - 10 from the Ateneo de
Manila University (ADMU) and 7 from De La
Salle University (DLSU). Regarding their study
levels, four of them were taking an English
training course at East Asian Pastoral Institute
(EAPI) at the ADMU; two were in the BA
programs in DLSU; six were in the MA
programs (four at the ADMU and two in DLSU);
and four were in the PhD programs in DLSU.
The data for the investigation were collected
from questionnaire and interviews. The
questionnaire consists of 16 items (Table 2) in
the following structure: Questions number one
to number five about English learning and
teaching in Vietnam; question number six about
ELT materials; question number 7 about daily
use of English; questions number eight to
number twelve about the awareness of standard
English; question number thirteen about the
ownership of English; questions fourteen and
fifteen about the attitudes towards Englishes; and
question number sixteen about intelligibility
among Englishes. The interviews were
conducted with 3 respondents to clarify their
answers given in the questionnaires and to probe
more into their opinion about their attitudes
towards Englishes in the world, particularly
Asian Englishes. The researcher was able to
interview three respondents only because some
respondents came back to Vietnam, and the
others were not willing for the interviews. The
data collected from the questionnaire were
computed in percentage; the interviews with the
respondents were transcribed; and based on the
transcription, their opinion on the attitudes
towards Englishes was described and
interpreted.
Findings
From the findings and interpretations, the
conclusion on Vietnamese students' awareness
of varieties of Englishes can be made as follows:
Most of the Vietnamese students preferred
American English (AmE) or British English
(BrE) because of the following main reasons: a)
AmE or BrE was considered standard, correct,

74K H O A H O C X A H O I V A N H A N V A N

and the most popular; b) AmE and BrE are

original languages; c) AmE or BrE were the
varieties of Englishes taught at school; and d)
Americans and British people were experienced
in materials designs. They did not prefer other
varieties of Englishes because they thought other
varieties of English were not original, correct,
or easy to understand. ( see Table 2)
From these findings, it is easily seen that
most of the respondents were not aware of the
existence as well as the importance of varieties

'standard American and British English;' and

they are not aware that now English is being
spoken by more non-native speakers of English
than speakers of English in the inner-circle
countries.
Next, the majority of the respondents were
living in the Philippines at the time they
answered the questionnaires. Thus most of them
(94.11%) spoke English to Filipinos every day.
Other nationalities such as Chinese, Thai,
Nigerian, Indonesian, Burmese, and people from

Table 2 Questions in the questionnaire2

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16

What varieties of Englishes were you taught in high school?

What variety of Englishes would you like to be taught at university?
What nationalities of teachers of English do you prefer?
How do you rank teachers of English based on their nationalities?
Are native speakers of English (e.g., American, British, Canadian, Australian, etc.) intrinsically better
English teachers than Vietnamese people?
What varieties of Englishes should be followed in the English learning materials for Vietnamese?
What nationalities do you often speak English to in your daily life?
What variety(ies) of English(es) is/ are considered the best? (Rank them in priority)
What variety(ies) of English(es) is/ are standard?
Do Asian people speak correct English like American or British people?
Should Vietnamese people follow American/ British standard of English for communication in Asia?
Will you be able to understand all other Englishes if you choose American or British English to study?
What country(ies) does English belong to?
How do you feel when communicating with Americans/ British people/ Canadians/ Australians?
How do you feel when communicating with Asian people in English?
With what do you think you need to be familiar in order to be able to understand foreigners speaking
English?

of Englishes, particularly Asian Englishes from

the neighboring countries in Asia. Their
preference for American English or British
English is just based on one criterion, viz
pronunciation - a linguistic level - and a false
conception of the popularity of American or
British English. Their understanding of
intelligibility which is ascribed to the concept
of 'standard' is limited just to the level of
linguistic code. In other words, they are not
aware of other factors as discussed earlier which
affect intelligibility in communication in
English. They are not aware that now varieties
of Englishes are more popular than the so-called

Sri Lanka were the people some of them spoke

English to every day. Only two of them (11.76%)
had chances to speak English to Americans or
British people every day. It means that most of
them spoke English to non-native speakers of
English much more often than to native speakers
of English.
Despite the fact that the majority of the
respondents spoke English to more non-native
speakers of English than native-speakers of
English from the inner-circle countries, half of
them did not prefer to follow Asian standard of
English for cross-cultural communication in
Asia. The majority of them (14 out of 17

K H O A H O C X A H O I V A N H A N V A N 75

respondents) preferred to follow American or

British standard of English for crosscommunication in Asia. The reasons are also the
same as those previous mentioned: 1) American
English or British English was considered
standard and popular, so they thought that using
these standard Englishes, one could
communicate with all the people in the world.
Their preferences for American or British
English were accounted for by their ranking the
varieties of English and their belief of the
standard English. 16 out of 17 respondents
thought that English from the inner-circle
countries was the best and most of them (14 out
of 17 respondents) thought that these varieties
were standard because, according to them, they
were correct, and more intelligible. Only one
respondent thought that Vietnamese English
(Vietlish) 3 is the best because it is easy to
understand for him. All this imply that they did
not think other varieties of English were correct
and intelligible. This interpretation can be
accounted for by the fact that almost all of them
(16 out of 17 respondents) did not think that
Asian people spoke correct or standard English
like Americans or British people. That is why
many of them (11 out of 17 respondents) thought
that if they chose American or British English
to study, they would be able to understand all
other Englishes. The reasons are just because
they thought American or British English was
an original language; its pronunciation was
standard, correct, and easy to understand.
Since most of them thought that the English
language was first spoken in England and the
United States, these English varieties were
original; other varieties of Englishes originated
from the varieties of English from England or
the U.S. Their belief accounts for the fact that
many of them (11 out of 17 respondents) thought
that the English language belonged to the British
or the Americans. Only 6 out of 17 respondents
thought that English belonged to no one or
everyone.
Due to the belief that American English or
British English was easy to understand,
intelligible, correct, and standard, most of them
(15 out of 17 respondents) had positive feelings
such as feelings of comfort, intelligibility, and

willingness when communicating in English

with Americans, British people, or those coming
from inner-circle countries. The statistical
f igures show that how they felt when
communicating with people from inner-circle
countries was based on just what they thought
was standard or correct. In brief, almost all the
subjects had positive feelings - being
comfortable, intelligible, or willing - when
speaking English with native speakers of
English; they did not feel so just because they
thought that their pronunciation was not as
standard as that of native speakers.
All the above conclusions help to confirm
that most of them preferred American English
or British English based on the linguistic
criterion - intelligibility in sounds, accents, and
pronunciation. This is proved by the following
statistical figures: a) most of the respondents
thought that to be able to understand foreigners
speaking English, they needed to be familiar
with foreigners' accents, pronunciation, or
grammar. Only some of them paid attention to
the familiarity with cultural and discoursal
aspects.
In conclusion, Vietnamese students' false
perceptions of what is called 'standard' English
and of the ownership of the English language
led them to their preferences for American
English or British English. They were not aware
of the importance of the familiarity with the
varieties of other Englishes, particularly Asian
Englishes, when they spoke English to more
Asian people than native-speakers of English.
What they understood about intelligibility,
standard, ownership, and the like was just based
on the only criterion, viz linguistic codes. They
were not aware of other aspects important for
cross-cultural communication such as culture,
discourse, pragmatics, and socio-linguistics.
From the findings as well as the conclusions
in this present investigation, there needs to be
an appropriate English language programs for
Asian people, particularly Vietnamese people so
that they will be equipped with an adequate
knowledge of the importance of other Englishes,
particularly in Asia. This will help them
successfully communicate with people in the
region in the English language. Last but not least,

76K H O A H O C X A H O I V A N H A N V A N

when they are aware of the role and the

importance of other varieties of Englishes, they
will be more willing to communicate with nonnative speakers of English in English. They will
have more positive feelings towards crosscultural communication with people coming
from outer- or expanding circles. This is a
pressing goal in English language teaching in
the world, particularly in Asia.
Conclusion
As found in the study, most of the subjects
were not aware of the concept of World
Englishes. Their understanding of intelligibility
is just limited to linguistic codes - sounds,
pronunciation, or accent. For other factors
influencing intelligibility such as culture and
pragmatics were unknown to them. This is due
to two main reasons: 1) BrE and AmE were
promoted by Vietnamese teachers coming back
from their English teaching training programs
in Britain and the United States; and 2) Since
after the national re-unification in 1975, the ELT
world in Vietnam has been awash with
commercially produced English language
teaching and learning materials with 'Anglo'
focus imported from these two countries. In
order to change this situation, two pressing issues
in ELT in Vietnam need to be addressed. First, a
new curriculum needs to be concerned with an
understanding of regional cultures, and it helps
learners of English realize three following
realities: 1) English is a lingua franca throughout
the South-East and East Asian region; 2) it is

used by people in the region to discuss regional

issues; and 3) more importantly, the use of
English between non-native speakers is much
greater than that between native speakers.
Second, ELT materials need to promote the local
or regional variety of English by presenting the
cultural and pragmatic norms of the speakers of
these varieties. In the context of Asia, a new
curriculum and materials should include Asian
or ASEAN cultural content and promote Asian
or ASEAN Englishes. Asian teachers of English
should help their learners of English realize that
models of the English language for Asian people
are not necessarily those imported from the
inner-circle countries like the United States,
Britain, Canada, Australia, etc. However, this is
actually a long way to go for Vietnamese
educators and Vietnamese teachers of English.
There are the following limitations of this
study: (1) The number of the sample is quite
small; (2) The conditions of conducting the
research, data from other sources such as
interviews with Vietnamese teachers of English
and Vietnamese educators, and teachers'
questionnaires cannot be accessed. As a result,
the findings in this study are not conclusive, and
correspondingly generalizations cannot be
made. In short, this study is actually an attempt
to get a slightest view of the extent to which
Vietnamese users of English are aware of World
Englishes, and aims to shed light on a larger
scale study in the future in terms of methodology
and the subject matter.

REFERENCES
1. Brogan, M. and Nguyen, T. H. (1999 Oct). The 3 R's of teacher training in Vietnam: revising, reviving and
researching. Paper presented at the Fourth International Conference on Language and Development, Hanoi,
Vietnam.
2. Canagarajah, S. (1999). Interrogating the "native-speaker fallacy": non-linguistic roots, non- pedagogical
results. In G. Braine (ed.) Non-native Educators in English Language Teaching. Mahwah, New Jersey, Lawrence
Erlbaum.
3. Crystal, D. (2003). English as a Global Language (2nd ed). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
4. Crystal, D. (1997) English as a global language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
5. Dang, T. H. (2004). ELT tertiary level in Vietnam: Historical overview and assessment of current policies and
practices. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, La Trobe University, Australia.
6. Do, H. T. (1996). Foreign language education policy in Vietnam: The reemergence of English and its impact on
higher education. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, university of Southern, California.
7. Do, H. T. (1999). Foreign language education policy in Vietnam: the emergence of English and its impact on
higher education. Paper presented at the Fourth International Conference on Language Development, Hanoi,
Vietnam.

K H O A H O C X A H O I V A N H A N V A N 77

8. Graddol, D. (1997). The Future of English?: A Guide to forecasting the popularity of the English language in the
21st century. London: British council.
9. Kachru, B. (1982). The other tongue. Illinois: University of Illinois Press.
10. Kachru, B. (1998). English as an Asian Language. Links & Letters, 5, 89 - 108.
11. Kachru, B. (2005). Asian English beyond the canon. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
12. Kirkpatrick, A. (2002). Englishes in Asia: Communication, identity, power and education. Australia: Language
Australia.
13. Nguyen, B. & Crabbe, D. (1999). The design and use of English languagetextbooks in Vietnam secondary
schools. Paper presented at the Fourth International Conference on Language Development, Hanoi, Vietnam.
14. Nguyen, L. & Kendall, H. H. (1981). After Saigon fell: Daily life under the Vietnamese Communist. Berkely:
Institute of Asian Studies. University of California.
15. Oka, H. (2004). A non-native approach to ELT: universal or Asian? Asian EFL Journal, 6 (1).
16. Patt, J. M. (1969). The language dilemma in Vietnam education. The Journal of Higher Education, 40 (5), 385 389.
17. Pennycook, A. (1994). The cultural politics of Enlish as an international language. New York: Longman.
18. Pennycook, A. (1998). English and the discourses of colonialism. London: Routledge.
19. Pham, H. H. (1999). The key socio-cultural factors that work against success in tertiary English language training
programs in Vietnam. Paper presented at the Fourth International Conference on Language and Development,
Hanoi, Vietnam.
20. Phan, L. H. (2005). Toward a critical notion of Appropriation of English as an international language. Asian EFL
Journal, 7 (3).
21. Philipson, R. (1992). Linguistic imperialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
22. Rajagopalan, K. (2004). The concept of 'World English' and its implications for ELT. ELT Journal, 58 (2).
23. Seidlhofer, B. (2005). English as a lingua franca. ELT Journal, 59 (4), 339 - 341.
24. Smith L. E. & Nelson, C. (2006). World Englishes and issues of intelligibility. In K. Braij, K. Yamuna, & C. Nelson
(Eds), The Handbook of World Englishes. Blackwell Publishing.

SUMMARY:

NHN THC CUA NGI VIT NAM

S DUNG TING ANH I VI CAC LOAI TING ANH
TRN TH GII

Nguyn Quang Tin, M.A.

Toan cu hoa a lam cho moi ngi, c bit la nhng ngi lam vic lin quan n
ting Anh, bao gm cac nha ngn ng, va giao vin ting Anh bit n khai nim "Cac
loai ting Anh trn th gii" (World Englishes) va xem xet lai khai nim "Ting Anh
chun" (Standard English) vn a c in su trong tm tr cua moi ngi. Tuy nhin,
vn con nhiu ngi s dung ting Anh nhiu ni trn th gii cha h nghe noi n
s tn tai cua khai nim "World Englishes" va vai tro c bit cua no trong mi quan h
vi khai nim "Ting Anh la ngn ng chung cua moi ngi" (English as a lingua
franca). y cung chnh la im mu cht cua cuc nghin cu vi 17 sinh vin Vit
Nam ang theo hoc tai Philippines ma bai vit nay mun trnh bay.

78K H O A H O C X A H O I V A N H A N V A N