# The accent of non-native English speakers when speaking English



## El intérprete

I was listening to a song by the Mexican band RBD in English, and noticed the foreign accent, which I know is no big deal, but it made me think about people who have Spanish as a first language and learn English as a foreign language.  A Mexican speaking English and a Chilean speaking English sound very similar to me.  However, Chileans and Mexicans sound very different when they speak Spanish.  If they just said one word maybe it would be similar, but if you heard a Chilean talk for just a few minutes, his or her accent would be distinguishable from a Mexican's.

But why is it that Spanish speakers seem to have a similar accent when speaking English?  I guess the obvious answer is they all speak the same language with more or less the same phonetic alphabet, but is there more to it?  I know this is a big generalization and there are many Spanish speakers who speak English with very little accent, but the vast majority of people I have met in Chile, from Chile and other Spanish speaking countries, have a similar accent, but it doesn't sound particularly Chilean or Mexican.

Has anyone else thought about this?


----------



## Wilma_Sweden

El intérprete said:


> Has anyone else thought about this?


Definitely, yes! There is a long thread about the reverse situation, i.e. how native English speakers sound when speaking foreign languages, but also about non-English speakers carrying their accents to English.

I don't think it's entirely impossible to identify which variant of Spanish someone speaks based on how they speak English, but presumably they would need to have a strong Spanish accent in order for that to be possible. I worked in London with a lot of Spanish speakers for a couple of years, mostly from mainland Spain or the Canary Islands, and seem to remember one of them claiming to be able to tell roughly which part of Spain someone was from by the way they spoke English. I certainly couldn't do that, I merely learned to distinguish between Italians, Portuguese or Spanish people based on their English. The first and most obvious sign of a Spanish speaker was always the way that they would add an e to 'difficult' consonant clusters such as Sp /espain/ (Spain), or St /estri:t/ (street). Possibly, intonation and stress patterns also distinguish one Spanish dialect from another, and if those patterns are carried over to English in a systematic manner, they should also be distinguishable.

This is true for Swedish speakers of English: the prosody of the different dialects are different enough to be distinguishable even when they speak English, if they are not accomplished speakers. I'm referring to those who have only learned English at school but never lived in an English-speaking country. Those who go to live in an English-speaking country as adults will probably perfect their pronunciation, but may still be identifiable as Swedish, or at least Scandinavian, based on their prosody. At that stage, it's usually impossible to tell with any accuracy what region they're from.

/Wilma


----------



## Forero

Some of the most common contrasts in English are equally foreign to all Spanish speakers: the difference between "sit" and "seat", the difference between "ones" and "once", the difference between "specially" and "especially".

People from certain parts of Spain do not have the characteristic difficulty with English "th" sounds that many non-English speakers have, but the position of "th" in words is different enough to be "foreign" and to make certain combinations "have an accent".  For example, English "th" cannot be interpreted as a type of "t" or "d" sound because it does not add a syllable in past tense ("waited" and "jaded" have two syllables each, but "toothed" and "bathed" have only one syllable each), and it cannot be interpreted as a kind of "s" or "z" because it does not add a syllable in "breaths" or "breathes" (unlike "stresses" and "buzzes").

Many of those same Spanish speakers with perfect _th_s have an interesting pronunciation of /s/ that distinguishes them from most Latin Americans and from most Europeans.

Spanish speakers familiar with Catalan or Portuguese can perhaps produce a perfect "uh" sound (as in "done") on their first try, but they still have to learn a lot of unfamiliar vowel contrasts to speak English without an accent.


----------



## ernest_

I think that all these dialects, however different they may sound, share a set of common phonetic features, such as the same 5-vowel system, which is what produces this effect. Now, if you analysed more closely these accents you'd probably find a lot of differences, for example, some dialects have a /ʃ/ sound ('sh'), whereas others would use 'ss' or 'ch' instead. Others replace 'n' and even 'm' at the end of a word with a nasal alveolar 'ng', so 'Camp Nou' is pronounced as /kaŋ nou/, etc. That being said, yes, it's interesting that Spanish speakers have a very similar accent when speak English, regardless of where they come from.


----------



## TimLA

Great thread!

Being in the hispanohablante "melting pot" of Los Angeles, I have the opportunity to hear many different types of spoken English from Spanish-speaking countries throughout the world 
(and even a primary Spanish-speaker from Romania, a hold-over from 400 years ago - but that's another story).

I find that many of my Mexican and Central American friends speak English with a similar accent - perhaps the Mexican accent is a bit more "sing-song", but not dramatically so.

The most dramatic differences that I find, and to me immediately identifiable, are those from Spain and Argentina.
Their particular mode of pronunciation in English is very different from the more common form that I hear from others in Southern California.
The "th" is more clear (corathon!), and the accent is more "rounded", "open" and "full" - if I might choose some poor descriptors.

To me, something equally interesting, is the accent of native AE speakers raised in a Spanish-speaking environment, but who don't speak Spanish.
Their accent and the phrasing of their sentences is "Los Angeles non-Spanish speaker".
But that discussion would be off-topic...


----------



## JamesM

I am also in the L.A. melting pot and I think there are noticeable differences from many countries.  In one office where I do work there are two people from Mexico, one from Columbia, and one from Peru.   The Columbian woman doesn't sound like the Mexican women to me, and the man from Peru sounds almost Italian when he speaks English; there is a lilt to his speech.  Even the other Spanish speakers notice it.


----------



## El intérprete

TimLA said:


> Great thread!
> 
> To me, something equally interesting, is the accent of native AE speakers raised in a Spanish-speaking environment, but who don't speak Spanish.
> Their accent and the phrasing of their sentences is "Los Angeles non-Spanish speaker".
> But that discussion would be off-topic...


Wait, wait.  Hold on a second.  The accent of native AE speakers raised in a Spanish-speaking environment who don't speak Spanish?  I don't know if I've met anyone like that.  Most people in North Carolina, where I'm from, have spoken English all their life and learned some Spanish in school, or have always spoken both languages.  I don't think I've met anyone influenced by an language they can't speak.  That is interesting.  Hopefully the moderators will allow you to make one more post about it.


----------



## ewhite

El intérprete said:


> I don't think I've met anyone influenced by an language they can't speak.



I think it quite possible to be influenced by a language one can't speak if one is living in a polyglot society. Even people who are thoroughly bilingual may have a "tone" in their English that indicates fluency in another language, dialect, or accent. And that tone can influence the speech of others.
For years, I have been listening to what for me is the classic New York accent (think Jimmy Cagney), morph into a more latino-African American blend.


----------



## Wilma_Sweden

El intérprete said:


> Wait, wait.  Hold on a second.  The accent of native AE speakers raised in a Spanish-speaking environment who don't speak Spanish?  I don't know if I've met anyone like that.  Most people in North Carolina, where I'm from, have spoken English all their life and learned some Spanish in school, or have always spoken both languages.  I don't think I've met anyone influenced by an language they can't speak.  That is interesting.  Hopefully the moderators will allow you to make one more post about it.


This is not very strange at all. It works indirectly. If you grow up in a neighbourhood where most people are native Spanish speakers, it will affect their way of speaking English, which, in turn, may affect your own English accent, even though you don't speak Spanish at all. 

/Wilma


----------



## miguel64086

I totally agree with TimLA and James M.  You can certainly tell the difference if not by country, but geographical zone.
 I'm from Chile, and if the speaker has a "good Spanish accent", I can tell where they are from.  It's like listening to their tones (lo que en español llamamos el cantito). 
  I do not want to appear snobish, but it seems to me that the less educated the person is, the easier is to tell their country of origen, since it's harder for them to learn the proper entonation and accent.

You should visit the following website: The speech accent archive.
It records people from all over the world reading the same text. It's amazing to see the differences and similarities in accents and speech.

http://accent.gmu.edu/browse_atlas.php


----------



## Wilma_Sweden

Thank you for sharing that link. It was most interesting! 



miguel64086 said:


> I do not want to appear snobish, but it seems to me that the less educated the person is, the easier is to tell their country of origen, since it's harder for them to learn the proper entonation and accent.


I disagree with you on the education level having anything to do with how they learn a foreign language, if you mean their general education level. I would say that their quality of English is the combined result of their personal aptitude, motivation, musicality and finally the quality of their English tuition. Even the best schools can teach English without paying attention to phonetics, which would then lead to a strong foreign accent in spite of many years of English taken at school.

/Wilma


----------



## miguel64086

Wilma,
You are right, the best schools can teach English without paying attention to phonetics.
I guess what I was trying to say is that the majority of the time, the less educated people are (*in the learning of English*), the bigger are the chances that we can tell from what part of South America they are.


----------



## El intérprete

miguel64086 said:


> Wilma,
> You are right, the best schools can teach English without paying attention to phonetics.
> I guess what I was trying to say is that the majority of the time, the less educated people are (*in the learning of English*), the bigger are the chances that we can tell from what part of South America they are.



Miguel, notice the changes I've made for you.
I guess what I was trying to say is, most of the time, the less educated people are in learning English, the greater the chances are that we can tell where they are from in South America.

I think education can certainly have an effect on a foreign speaker's accent when speaking English, but it is definitely not the deciding factor.  One of my friends in Chile studied English in Santiago and went to England for two years and I still don't understand what he's talking about sometimes.


----------



## Wilma_Sweden

El intérprete said:


> I think education can certainly have an effect on a foreign speaker's accent when speaking English, but it is definitely not the deciding factor.  One of my friends in Chile studied English in Santiago and went to England for two years and I still don't understand what he's talking about sometimes.


I second that statement. The quality of your English tuition is certainly a factor, but we have to remember that it's very hard for an adult to sound truly native in a foreign language and most of us carry our native prosody into the foreign language to a certain extent. More attention to pronunciation and prosody at school at an early age would certainly help, at least in those countries that start English tuition early, like in Scandinavia (usually age 9 or 10). 

/Wilma


----------



## Chtipays

JamesM said:


> I am also in the L.A. melting pot and I think there are noticeable differences from many countries.  In one office where I do work there are two people from Mexico, one from Columbia, and one from Peru.   The Columbian woman doesn't sound like the Mexican women to me, and the man from Peru sounds almost Italian when he speaks English; there is a lilt to his speech.  Even the other Spanish speakers notice it.



James, I think you mean Colombia and Colombian.

Columbian means something else: _of or relating to Christopher Columbus
_
Relatively common mistake made by Americans


----------



## El intérprete

Chtipays said:


> James, I think you mean Colombia and Colombian.
> 
> Columbian means something else: _of or relating to Christopher Columbus
> _
> Relatively common mistake made by Americans


Yes, you are right to correct James, but when Americans write Col*u*mbia they are usually referring to Col*u*mbia, South Carolina.  Writing Col*u*mbia instead of Col*o*mbia for the country in South America is a common mistake made by many people.  I'm sure I've made that mistake several times.  Americans are certainly not the only ones. You will rarely hear people say "Columbian" in the sense that you are thinking.  _of or relating to Christopher Columbus_ is something that would not normally cross our minds, although it is perfectly correct, depending on the context.


----------



## panjabigator

El intérprete said:


> Yes, you are right to correct James, but when Americans write Col*u*mbia they are usually referring to Col*u*mbia, South Carolina.  Writing Col*u*mbia instead of Col*o*mbia for the country in South America is a common mistake made by many people.  I'm sure I've made that mistake several times.  Americans are certainly not the only ones. You will rarely hear people say "Columbian" in the sense that you are thinking.  _of or relating to Christopher Columbus_ is something that would not normally cross our minds, although it is perfectly correct, depending on the context.



Lately, when I write Columbia, I'm referring to the NY institution.  Just another instance of confusion


----------



## Ynez

El intérprete said:


> One of my friends in Chile studied English in Santiago and went to England for two years and I still don't understand what he's talking about sometimes.



That's just because English is very difficult. 

It is really difficult for us to pronounce different types of "s". My "s" and some Chilean's "s" are different, but he'll always use the same "s" and so will I. The different English vowels are terribly difficult too. 

As for recognizing...we could recognize most Spanish speakers even before they speak, so it is not that difficult if they speak and have accent. 

But it is also easy to see someone is an English speaker no matter where they are from.


----------



## Chtipays

I guess it also depends on the level of English, an Uruguayan friend who lives in Spain but has to speak English frequently at work complains that some Spaniards pronounce the English "h" as the Spanish "g" or "j"


----------



## El intérprete

Chtipays said:


> I guess it also depends on the level of English, an *a* Uruguayan friend who lives in Spain but has to speak English frequently at work complains that some Spaniards pronounce the English "h" as the Spanish "g" or "j"


Accents are hard to reduce and change.  I know my accent is noticeable when I speak Spanish.  However, I don't see any reason to _complain_ about them unless you simply can't understand what the person is saying.


----------



## Grux

Chtipays said:


> I guess it also depends on the level of English, an Uruguayan friend who lives in Spain but has to speak English frequently at work complains that some Spaniards pronounce the English "h" as the Spanish "g" or "j"


They should be from Madrid or from the north of Spain. In Extremadura, Andalucía and to some extent in the south of Castilla we use this sound when speaking Spanish in our natural accent, so we do not have any difficulties with it.

Maybe this is a bit off-topic, but I have notice that when listening to somebody speaking English, I often understand the speech much better if the person is not a native English speaker, though his/her first language is different than mine. In part it is because they use a simpler vocabulary, but I think in part it has to do with pronunciation, too. 
Does the same occur for Spanish?


----------



## El intérprete

Grux said:


> They should *must* be from Madrid or from the north of Spain. In Extremadura, Andalucía and to some extent in the south of Castilla we use this sound when speaking Spanish in our natural accent, so we do not have any difficulties with it.
> 
> Maybe this is a bit off-topic, but I have *noticed* that when listening to somebody speaking English, I often understand the speech much better if the person is not a native English speaker, though his/her first language is different than mine. In part it is because they use a simpler vocabulary, but I think in part it has to do with pronunciation, too.
> Does the same occur for Spanish?


Sometimes.  I have had American friends tell me they understand me better when I speak Spanish than when they hear Chileans speak Spanish.  But I know my pronunciation in Spanish is not perfectly clear, given that Chileans often say "¿Cómo?" when I talk to them.  I think foreigners tend to try harder to pronounce words when they speak a foreign language, and at times that can make it easier for people of all languages to understand them.


----------



## miguel64086

Grux said:


> They should be from Madrid or from the north of Spain. In Extremadura, Andalucía and to some extent in the south of Castilla we use this sound when speaking Spanish in our natural accent, so we do not have any difficulties with it.
> 
> Maybe this is a bit off-topic, but I have notice that when listening to somebody speaking English, I often understand the speech much better if the person is not a native English speaker, though his/her first language is different than mine. In part it is because they use a simpler vocabulary, but I think in part it has to do with pronunciation, too.
> Does the same occur for Spanish?




This happens to me all the time at work. I'm the only one who can understand many of our customers calling from India.  I think it has to do with our (non-native speakers) tolerance to different accents (since we have one ) and willingness to look over the common mistakes that a foreign speaker would make. Besides, it is true that a non-native speaker tends to use a simpler vocabulary and sentence construction, where a native speaker simple speaks the way they always do, without paying attention to the use of slang, non-standard usage, etc (I know.. this is a generalization that most people on this forum....)

Cheers


----------



## Wilma_Sweden

miguel64086 said:


> Besides, it is true that a non-native speaker tends to use a simpler vocabulary and sentence construction, where a native speaker simple speaks the way they always do, without paying attention to the use of slang, non-standard usage, etc (I know.. this is a generalization that most people on this forum....)


Spoken language is full of strange expressions that you don't learn at school, so this is hardly surprising, and a local dialect that deviates a great deal from the school 'norm' (usually RP or GA) doesn't help either! The advantage of being non-native is that you are at least bilingual, while native speakers who speak only English might find it harder to adapt their speech to suit a less proficient non-native speaker.

/Wilma


----------



## El intérprete

miguel64086 said:


> This happens to me all the time at work. I'm the only one who can understand many of our customers calling from India.  I think it has to do with our (non-native speakers) tolerance to different accents (since we have one ) and willingness to look over the common mistakes that a foreign speaker would make. Besides, it is true that a non-native speaker tends to use a simpler vocabulary and sentence construction, where a native speaker simple speaks the way they always do, without paying attention to the use of slang, non-standard usage, etc (I know.. this is a generalization that most people on this forum....)
> 
> Cheers


In my experience with tech support from India, the problem is sometimes the tech support staff tend to speak too fast.  Other times their accent is simply too foreign and they don't use correct pronunciation, but one thing that especially makes it hard to understand a foreign speaker is when they try to speak English fast.  In my opinion, English is not a language to be spoken fast if you are foreign and have a noticeable accent in addition to pronunciation problems.  Generally, people will not get mad at a foreign speaker for speaking too slow, but speaking too fast and in an incomprehensible manner is irritating.

Sometimes when I hear two people from India speaking English to each other, it sounds like they are speaking another language.


----------



## deuruguay

TimLA said:


> The most dramatic differences that I find, and to me immediately identifiable, are those from Spain and Argentina.
> Their particular mode of pronunciation in English is very different from the more common form that I hear from others in Southern California.


This is so true. Uruguayan and Argentinian Spanish are really similar (neighboring countries).  When I went to the US, same happened to my kids when living there, we were asked if we were Portuguese.  They couldn´t understand we were from South America.  I think the intonation has a lot to do with this.


----------



## miguel64086

El intérprete said:


> Sometimes when I hear two people from India speaking English to each other, it sounds like they are speaking another language.




Dear friend El intérprete,
They ARE speaking another language, they are speaking English (not american)! lol , just kidding. 
 I understand that in India they learn English in School at a very young age, because later on business is conducted in English... the problem is that you have about 3 times as many people speaking English than people leave in the US. I mean, there are more people speaking English as a second language than native speakers!  It's natural that, like any other language, it would evolve and take another evolucionary path than American English, thus making it sometimes so different that indeed sounds like a different language.
Piensa en qué tan distinto es el coa en Chile del coa del puerto en Argentina.


----------



## Judica

It was my impression that people in India learn BE not AE. This may contribute to misunderstanding.


----------



## TimLA

Judica said:


> It was my impression that people in India learn BE not AE. This may contribute to misunderstanding.


 
*VERY* interesting comment!

I have many many colleagues from India, and there is a huge BE influence,
but to be honest, it might be considered "India English" because of the very different structures and words used.

A few months ago a friend of mine told me he was asked to translate between an Indian colleague and an American one for a business deal.

My curiosity was piqued, and I immediately asked "What language were you speaking? Hindi? Tamal? Malayalam?

He smiled and immediately answered "No, English!"

We both had a good laugh. An AE speaker who could no understand the accent or diction of an "IE" speaker....aren't languages great!


----------



## Nunty

One of the fascinating and wonderful things in English Only is learning that India English is special and unique not only in accent and diction, but is rich in idiom of its own. I suppose I am very ethnocentric for not realizing that before.


----------



## trance0

Well, if I return to the topic. I had the opportunity of hearing the British speak or better yet struggle to speak my native tongue Slovene. The most obvious problem they have is pronouncing the thrilled r. They also have great problems pronouncing certain consonant clusters, and they can't seem to pronounce many of the vowels clearly without diphthongising them.


----------



## Outsider

trance0 said:


> The most obvious problem they have is pronouncing the thrilled r.


_Trilled_ r. Another common mistake of non-native English speakers when speaking English.


----------



## Frank78

Outsider said:


> _Trilled_ r. Another common mistake of non-native English speakers when speaking English.



I guess then the Scottish aren´t native speakers.


----------



## danielfranco

Okay, let me mention a couple of things that have not been mentioned yet.

First, we ought to consider that the differences in accents in Spanish speaking people are regional, but the overarching limitations of the spoken language win in the end: the phonemes. In Spanish, we only have 24 (or 25, depending on who you talk to about it) and the possibilities of allophones are considerably less numerous than in English, which has anywhere from 43 to 53 phonemes, depending on the region. So, in Spanish, our pronunciation and diction of English sounds is incomplete in very much the same manner, whatever our motherland. So, for anyone to insist that they can tell where the Hispanic speaker comes from originally just by their accent in English, well, I guess they have a very talented ear, to say the very least.

Also, I don't completely agree with the observation that *all* foreigners use a simplified vocabulary. On the contrary, when I was in college (last century!) and I got to meet people from all over the world, it seemed to me that the foreigners were the only ones that strived to speak in grammatically correct sentences, which made conversation very difficult, of course, since native speakers are more used to their peculiar regionalisms and speech patterns. Now, when I met people from other countries (especially from Mexico) that learned to speak English outside a formal environment ("on the streets"), those are the ones that speak with a simplified vocabulary and incorrect grammar.

Okay, I'm done for now…
D


----------



## Frank78

danielfranco said:


> Also, I don't completely agree with the observation that *all* foreigners use a simplified vocabulary. On the contrary, when I was in college (last century!) and I got to meet people from all over the world, it seemed to me that the foreigners were the only ones that strived to speak in grammatically correct sentences, which made conversation very difficult, of course, since native speakers are more used to their peculiar regionalisms and speech patterns. Now, when I met people from other countries (especially from Mexico) that learned to speak English outside a formal environment ("on the streets"), those are the ones that speak with a simplified vocabulary and incorrect grammar.
> 
> Okay, I'm done for now…
> D



A phenomenon I recognized is that English learners use far more often words of Latin origin, because they know them from their own language as borrowed/foreign word. While on the other hand a native speaker sticks more towards Anglo-Saxon words, e.g. calculate vs. reckon, mature vs. ripe, prior to vs. before.
This leads us to the next point. While non natives would use e.g. "consider" or "reflect" (Latin) more often instead of "think + _prep._" because you have to think about which preposition to use.


----------



## mirx

Frank78 said:


> A phenomenon I recognized is that English learners use far more often words of Latin origin, because they know them from their own language as borrowed/foreign word. While on the other hand a native speaker sticks more towards Anglo-Saxon words, e.g. calculate vs. reckon, mature vs. ripe, prior to vs. before.
> This leads us to the next point. While non natives would use e.g. "consider" or "reflect" (Latin) more often instead of "think + _prep._" because you have to think about which preposition to use.



This can be true for learners whose mother tongue is another European language, I am not sure though, if the same could be said about Asian or African language speakers.


----------



## Wilma_Sweden

mirx said:


> This can be true for learners whose mother tongue is another European language, I am not sure though, if the same could be said about Asian or African language speakers.


I'm not sure that it matters. The beauty of the latinate vocabulary in English is that often the scope of meaning is wider, i.e. a Latinate word might be more abstract and/or fit into more contexts than its anglo-saxon synonyms. Also, apart from avoiding the issue of prepositions, we also avoid the issue of phrasal verbs, which can be quite tricky for any non-native, regardless of linguistic background.


Frank78 said:


> I guess then the Scottish aren´t native speakers.


Hehe, being able to decipher what the Scots are saying is certainly a t(h)rilling experience... 

/Wilma


----------



## mirx

Wilma_Sweden said:


> Also, apart from avoiding the issue of prepositions, we also avoid the issue of phrasal verbs, which can be quite tricky for any non-native, regardless of linguistic background.
> 
> /Wilma



All I am saying is that a Chinese speaker, for example, may not feel more comfortable using vocab in English with Latin origin. A Portuguese or Italian speaker, on the other hand, will just naturally use the Latin version of the language. As for propositions and phrasal verbs, well many non-natives just don't use them, whether in the Anglo or the Latin mode.


----------



## Hulalessar

El intérprete said:


> In my experience with tech support from India, the problem is sometimes the tech support staff tend to speak too fast.


 
I think that that is probably an illusion created by the fact that many Indian speakers of English use syllable timing rather than the stress timing used by most native speakers of English. It is I think the syllable timing, more than anything else, that makes it difficult for many native speakers of English to understand many Indian speakers. It gives the impression that the stress is in the wrong place and throws many listeners.


----------



## mcc7x

Quote:                                                                      Originally Posted by *miguel64086* 

 
                 Wilma,
You are right, the best schools can teach English without paying attention to phonetics.
I guess what I was trying to say is that the majority of the time, the less educated people are (*in the learning of English*), the bigger are the chances that we can tell from what part of South America they are.

Miguel, notice the changes I've made for you.
I guess what I was trying to say is, most of the time, the less educated people are in learning English, the greater the chances are that we can tell *where they are from in South America*.

OR:

"...the greater the chances are that we can tell *what part of South America they are from*."

This construction is totally fine!! The only issue with it is that the preposition "from" has to go at the end of the sentence. (And yes, it is perfectly acceptable to end sentences in prepositions, lest outmoded grammarians should tell you otherwise!!!)

I would actually suggest reworking "the less educated people are in learning English" to something along the lines of:


"the more basic the level of people's English (is)"
"the lower the level of people's English (is)"
"the more basic people's English (is)"
To give a final result of:

"Most of the time, the more basic people's English is, the greater the chances are that we we will be able to tell what part of South America they are from by listening to their accent."

The words I have added in black serve to underscore the logic of the sentence!!

best,
mcc7x


----------



## mcc7x

deuruguay said:


> This is so true. Uruguayan and Argentinian Spanish are really similar (neighboring countries).  When I went to the US, same happened to my kids when living there, we were asked if we were Portuguese.  They couldn´t understand we were from South America.  I think the intonation has a lot to do with this.



Hola deuruguay!

I think Americans' taking you for "Portuguese" might have more to do with the typically American "racial" concept of Latin Americans as primarily being of mixed Indigenous and European blood. The "typical" _rioplatense _phenotype (Italian mixed with Spanish and some German, and very little native American component) usually clashes with this commonly-held notion, and probably much more so than the intonation of one's accent speaking English. Even for people of my grandparents' generation (born in the 1920s and 1930s), the word "Spanish" was used to refer to Latin Americans in general, and one can still find this usage in many parts of the United States. Of course, keep in mind that the most widely represented Latin Americans (i.e. "Spanish") in the United States have historically been from Mexico (or from Texas, or the Mexican Cession of 1848 >> California, Arizona, N. Mexico, Nevada, etc.), and in their majority these speakers reflected this particular genetic mix.

So, in conclusion, this association of the identifier "Spanish" with the concept of a "mixed-race Spanish speaker from Latin America" still holds a lot of sway in United States race politics. And even though this particular usage of "Spanish" has been replaced in politically correct language by "Hispanic" or "Latino" (in addition to specific demonyms for Americans of Mexican and Puerto Rican descent), a "typically" European-looking Uruguayan or Argentine will still strike many Americans as not quite fitting into the mold of what a "Hispanic" should look like. And once you do not _"look"_ the part, odds are the brain will reason that you do not _"sound"_ the part, either.

Best,
mcc7x


----------



## lcfatima

Does everyone agree with the premise of the original query? That all native Spanish speakers sound the same in English. I don't think that's true at all. Puerto Ricans sound way different than Mexicans sound from Spaniards. There are some similarities but the accents are definately discernable.


----------



## elirlandes

I don't agree - For example, I find that there is a noticeable difference in accents between people from central Mexico and those from Sinaloa. [With apologies] I have met people from Los Mochis who sound more like a caricature from a Spaghetti Western or like the cartoon mouse, Speedy Gonzales.

In Spain, I find that both the Basque and Catalan accents are discernable in English, as opposed to the rest of Spain.

Even more interesting, I find that Catalans who speak Castellano as a first language have a slightly different accent in English to those who speak Catalá as their mother tongue - the longer vowels are more pronounced...


----------



## mirx

elirlandes said:


> I don't agree - For example, I find that there is a noticeable difference in accents between people from central Mexico and those from Sinaloa. [With apologies] I have met people from Los Mochis who sound more like a caricature from a Spaghetti Western or like the cartoon mouse, Speedy Gonzales.


 
I don't know, I am Mexican and I cannot perceive those differences that you are talking about, to me all Mexicans sound more or less the same. I am wondering if perhaps the way those people talked had more to do with their own abilities and skills to speak the language, than with the general accent of the people of those places.


----------



## Ynez

mirx said:


> I don't know, I am Mexican I cannot perceive those differences that you are talking about, to me all Mexicans sound more or less the same. I am wondering if perhaps the way those people talked had more to do with their own abilities and skills to speak the language, than with the general accent of the people of those places.



I agree. You could only see a person's native regional accent in a foreign language if that person speaks terribly bad.

Native catalans have some particular phonological features (ll for instance), but not Basque speakers, as far as I know.


----------



## acemach

mirx said:


> All I am saying is that a Chinese speaker, for example, may not feel more comfortable using vocab in English with Latin origin. A Portuguese or Italian speaker, on the other hand, will just naturally use the Latin version of the language. As for propositions and phrasal verbs, well many non-natives just don't use them, whether in the Anglo or the Latin mode.


 
From my experience, native speakers of Chinese languages (or Malay, or Tamil) in Malaysia often prefer to stick to shorter words, even if it means botching up their prepositions. I hear 'think + (wrong) prep' much more often than 'consider/reflect'. Of course, more often than not they learn it from informal contexts, and usually use it formally only when they are beyond the botching stage. =]

Ace


----------



## Kevin Beach

My only "live" experience of listening to Hispanophones speaking English is of (mainly) Castillian Spaniards. One of the typical features of their accent is that they tend to use a much shorter pitch range than we do in BrE, so their speech can sound almost monotonous (and sometimes rapid, if they are fairly fluent). But I understand that this is a feature of Castillian anyway.

I have heard many New World Hispanophones speaking English on TV and in films, particularly Mexicans and Puerto Ricans. Admittedly, they are using AmE instead of BrE, but the most significant difference from Castillians is the increased modulation. Latin-American English has a music of its own that can be a delight to listen to.


----------



## Vanest

Hello Everybody,

I have noticed that people who only know English cannot tell the difference between different Spanish accents in English. In my workplace, there are several Hispanic people. There are Mexican, Ecuadorian, Spanish and Argentinean people. When we speak English, we can hear the regional differences between our accents. However, this may just be due to the fact that we know where we are from and when we speak Spanish amongst each other, we can certainly hear our different accents. According to my own perception, my Ecuadorean Spanish accent in English is different from the Argentinean accent, the Spanish accent and the Mexican accent in English. But according to the English speaking people, we all have the same accent!


----------



## Frank78

Vanest said:


> Hello Everybody,
> 
> I have noticed that people who only know English cannot tell the difference between different Spanish accents in English. In my workplace, there are several Hispanic people. There are Mexican, Ecuadorian, Spanish and Argentinean people. When we speak English, we can hear the regional differences between our accents. However, this may just be due to the fact that we know where we are from and when we speak Spanish amongst each other, we can certainly hear our different accents. According to my own perception, my Ecuadorean Spanish accent in English is different from the Argentinean accent, the Spanish accent and the Mexican accent in English. But according to the English speaking people, we all have the same accent!



Exactly the same happend to me. 2 girls (one from Poland, the other one from Serbia - both slavonic languages) asked me if the have the same accent in German. I said yes. They couldn´t believe it, they said they sound completly different. 

It´s not based on the fact the you´re monolingual, I think. But your ear is not sensible enough to hear differences in pronounciation and stress from languages you don´t know.

For example I could tell you if somebody is from Austria or Germany if he/she speaks English.


----------



## Judica

There are going to be noticeable differences to those who may travel more frequently than others and to those who may have lived abroad. Then there are what I call the "special people", who possess intensive listening skills.

Sure there are people who can tell the difference between someone (while speaking English) who is from N. Mexico vs S. Mexico, Chile, Guatemala, Germany, India, Pakistan, or Argentina. 

Its not very different than being able to tell who is from Massachusetts and who is from Texas while speaking English.


----------



## kat200718

This is kind of the reverse but I know as an English speaker I can definitely tell the difference between an American speaking Spanish and an English person speaking Spanish. The English don't pronounce the R's at the end of Spanish (or English, for that matter haha) words often times, and their accent just overall sounds British. 
But on the other hand, I can't tell much the difference between different Spanish speakers speaking English. At least, I wouldn't be able to identify from which country they were.


----------



## ampurdan

I wonder if a native English speaker with a good command of French could tell the difference between a Québecois stranger and a French one, both of whom speaking in English.


----------



## nand-o

Kevin Beach said:


> My only "live" experience of listening to Hispanophones speaking English is of (mainly) Castillian Spaniards. One of the typical features of their accent is that they tend to use a much shorter pitch range than we do in BrE, so their speech can sound almost monotonous (and sometimes rapid, if they are fairly fluent). But I understand that this is a feature of Castillian anyway.
> 
> I have heard many New World Hispanophones speaking English on TV and in films, particularly Mexicans and Puerto Ricans. Admittedly, they are using AmE instead of BrE, but the most significant difference from Castillians is the increased modulation.



Es una esplendida descripción


----------



## Pedro y La Torre

ampurdan said:


> I wonder if a native English speaker with a good command of French could tell the difference between a Québecois stranger and a French one, both of whom speaking in English.



Yes, the difference is immediately noticeable. Besides the differences in phonology and intonation (which are generally very different), the Québécois tend to have more "American" accents. I suppose this is due to the fact that they're far more used to pronouncing English words_ à l'américaine_, and thus they tend to master the accent far better than most French people can.


----------



## mirx

Pedro y La Torre said:


> Yes, the difference is immediately noticeable. Besides the differences in phonology and intonation (which are generally very different), the Québécois tend to have more "American" accents. I suppose this is due to the fact that they're far more used to pronouncing English words_ à l'américaine_, and thus they tend to master the accent far better than most French people can.


 
Well, I have to confess my ignorance and guilt over this topic up until a few months ago. A guy from Quebec stayed at my house and he sounded completely French, didn't have a good command of English and his accent was terribly strong. I had assumed that all French Canadians were bilingual and had, when speaking English, a normal Canadian accent. Wrong!

I suppose that if you know French then it would be easier to see the immediate differences bewteen the two accents. But people with no knowledge of French could hardly distinguish between a Quebecker and a French person.


----------



## Pedro y La Torre

mirx said:


> Well, I have to confess my ignorance and guilt over this topic up until a few months ago. A guy from Quebec stayed at my house and he sounded completely French, didn't have a good command of English and his accent was terribly strong. I had assumed that all French Canadians were bilingual and had, when speaking English, a normal Canadian accent. Wrong!
> 
> I suppose that if you know French then it would be easier to see the immediate differences bewteen the two accents. But people with no knowledge of French could hardly distinguish between a Quebecker and a French person.



I suppose so. But I was responding to the post which specifically asked "I wonder if a native English speaker with _a good command of French_ could tell the difference."

If I were to hear a Brazilian and a Portuguese person speaking English, I would probably not be able to tell the difference between the two either but, as I speak French, it is immediately clear to me which is which.

Edit: Here is an example of a Quebec politician struggling quite badly with English, but even here, her accent is very different from a normal French person's. A non-French speaker would probably not hear the difference but for those who do, I think it's relatively easy to spot.


----------



## ampurdan

During my very brief stay in Québec city and Montréal, I had the chance to talk in English with some Québecois: some of them sounded 100% AE speakers to my foreign ear (actually, I can't know if they were really native French speakers or true bilinguals, all I can say is that they also spoke French like natives to my foreign ears), some of them sounded just like most French sound to me when speaking English (all of them were people from Québec city).

I must say I only managed to tell the difference between Québécois and French from France after a while, and it was not easy at all. I agree that it has to do a great deal with intonation, they seem to lengthen some word endings. My French is just slightly better than passable, though.

It seemed to me that Québécois and French from France were more similar than Spanish from Spain (except the Canary Islands) and Spanish from Latin America is (and I'm just talking about intonation here). I'm not in the position to judge impartially, though.


----------



## Pedro y La Torre

ampurdan said:


> During my very brief stay in Québec city and Montréal, I had the chance to talk in English with some Québecois: some of them sounded 100% AE speakers to my foreign ear (actually, I can't know if they were really native French speakers or true bilinguals, all I can say is that they also spoke French like natives to my foreign ears), some of them sounded just like most French sound to me when speaking English (all of them were people from Québec city).
> 
> I must say I only managed to tell the difference between Québécois and French from France after a while, and it was not easy at all. I agree that it has to do a great deal with intonation, they seem to lengthen some word endings. My French is just slightly better than passable, though.
> 
> It seemed to me that Québécois and French from France were more similar than Spanish from Spain (except the Canary Islands) and Spanish from Latin America is (and I'm just talking about intonation here). I'm not in the position to judge impartially, though.



I cannot say whether that is true or not as my Spanish level is nowhere near good enough to judge. I can usually hear a small difference between Latin Americans and Spaniards when they speak English (Latin Americans speak slower in the main) but no more than this.

When a Quebecker speaks English though I almost immediately know where they're from. The French accent on the other hand is, well French 

(What I write is a personal impression, it may or may not be true for others. I have no objective proof to back it up).


----------



## Kevin Beach

Pedro y La Torre said:


> Edit: Here is an example of a Quebec politician struggling quite badly with English, but even here, her accent is very different from a normal French person's. A non-French speaker would probably not hear the difference but for those who do, it's very noticeable (at least it is for me).


What struck me about this Quebecoise was that both her French and her English (despite her problems with English vocabulary) were clearer to my BrE ear than I am used to from most French people I encounter. I didn't detect anything noticeably North American in her English speech - just increased clarity.

But then, sometimes I think that European French speech is still departing from its orthography at at an alarming rate!


----------



## Pedro y La Torre

Kevin Beach said:


> What struck me about this Quebecoise was that both her French and her English (despite her problems with English vocabulary) were clearer to my BrE ear than I am used to from most French people I encounter. I didn't detect anything noticeably North American in her English speech - just increased clarity.
> 
> But then, sometimes I think that European French speech is still departing from its orthography at at an alarming rate!



It would be a stretch to see that her accent was markedly AE but nevertheless I notice a definite "American" strain in it, something which, for a virtual beginner, I find rather striking. What you say about increased clarity is generally true, as I mentioned Quebeckers usually pronounce English words (including those which have become part of everyday Quebec French such as "cute") as we do in English, contrary to the French practice where everything is "francisé".

As a result of the vastly differing intonation and (better?) exposure to the English language, the Québécois accent in English is normally quite different and, I believe, pretty easy to spot for the trained ear.


----------



## Sepia

Obviously American media influence the way a lot of non-native speakers pronounce English words, world wide. What ist strange though, is that lots of English teachers claime the only correct way to pronounce things is not only the British way, but in this pseudo-accent they call Oxford-English. I personally had one very hostile encounter with a professor at a Danish university who claimed I were stressing the wron syllable in some word. As I am obviously speaking AE told him there were different ways of pronouncing this word and showed him the pronounciation as described in my Webster's which made him claim that acording to the curriculum only BE was allowed. 

I checked up on this and found there was no legal foundation for this claim of his. I hear of such situations again and again from other people where teachers are trying to prevent people from speaking AE by teaching, threatening or blackmailing them although there is nothing in their laws telling that one version of the English language is to be considered more important than the other.


----------



## Pedro y La Torre

Sepia said:


> Obviously American media influence the way a lot of non-native speakers pronounce English words, world wide. What ist strange though, is that lots of English teachers claime the only correct way to pronounce things is not only the British way, but in this pseudo-accent they call Oxford-English. I personally had one very hostile encounter with a professor at a Danish university who claimed I were stressing the wron syllable in some word. As I am obviously speaking AE told him there were different ways of pronouncing this word and showed him the pronounciation as described in my Webster's which made him claim that acording to the curriculum only BE was allowed.
> 
> I checked up on this and found there was no legal foundation for this claim of his. I hear of such situations again and again from other people where teachers are trying to prevent people from speaking AE by teaching, threatening or blackmailing them although there is nothing in their laws telling that one version of the English language is to be considered more important than the other.



I too find this extremely annoying trend amongst some learners (usually those whose language skills leave a lot to be desired). 

I once had an encounter with a French person to whom I was trying to explain the difference in pronunciation between _cot_ and _caught_. I thought I had done a good job until I was told something along the lines of "but you're Irish so maybe it's not the _proper_ way to say it, how do English people pronounce it?"

My help stopped there.


----------



## Sepia

Pedro y La Torre said:


> I too find this extremely annoying trend amongst some learners (usually those whose language skills leave a lot to be desired).
> 
> I once had an encounter with a French person to whom I was trying to explain the difference in pronunciation between _cot_ and _caught_. I thought I had done a good job until I was told something along the lines of "but you're Irish so maybe it's not the _proper_ way to say it, how do English people pronounce it?"
> 
> My help stopped there.


 
... although some surveys claim that Irish-English is one of the versions of the language that are well understood and widely accepted by native and non native speakers all over the world ...

If somebody asks me how English people REALLY speak I always suggest them to watch the two famous Guy Richie movies: "Lock Stock and two Smoking Barrels" and "Snatch".


----------



## ernest_

Pedro y La Torre said:


> I too find this extremely annoying trend amongst some learners (usually those whose language skills leave a lot to be desired).
> 
> I once had an encounter with a French person to whom I was trying to explain the difference in pronunciation between _cot_ and _caught_. I thought I had done a good job until I was told something along the lines of "but you're Irish so maybe it's not the _proper_ way to say it, how do English people pronounce it?"
> 
> My help stopped there.



Well, maybe it wasn't exactly a tactful choice of words, but I certainly can understand the concern this person had. There are many features of Standard British English that are very specific and escape speakers of other dialects, even speakers of other English dialects. For example, the so-called bath-trap split, it only occurred in the South of England. If you ask a Mancunian how 'gas mask' is pronounced in SBE, do you think he'd be able to tell you? Quite frankly, I'd take it with a grain of salt.


----------



## Sowka

Hello 

Why would anybody want to learn Standard British English pronunciation in its purest form?  The main purpose of language is communication, and each language has wide tolerance zones with regard to pronunciation -- there are local variations, individual variations, social-group variations, all kinds of variations. Unless I want to become an actress , there's no need for perfect standard pronunciation.

In my opinion, the main focus should be placed on getting the words and sentences right. And if people - in the best case several people from different places - who have grown up with the language can help you with that, you'll be able to express yourself with confidence. People will understand you. That's what it's all about.


----------



## Pedro y La Torre

ernest_ said:


> Well, maybe it wasn't exactly a tactful choice of words, but I certainly can understand the concern this person had. There are many features of Standard British English that are very specific and escape speakers of other dialects, even speakers of other English dialects. For example, the so-called bath-trap split, it only occurred in the South of England. If you ask a Mancunian how 'gas mask' is pronounced in SBE, do you think he'd be able to tell you? Quite frankly, I'd take it with a grain of salt.



The comment in question had nothing to do with wanting to learn certain features of "Standard British English"*. It had everything to do with the fact that this person mistakenly thought that "English from England" was the only "correct" accent/dialect. Such an attitude is also evident in Sepia's encouter with her university professor - the language is called "English", therefore "English from England", or more specifically "RP" must be the correct one, right? Wrong.

Such thinking is baseless, to put it mildly.

*In any case there is no specific accent to British English so your comment refers to a dialectical feature, not to a feature of a some "accepted" standard.


----------



## Frank78

Sepia said:


> I checked up on this and found there was no legal foundation for this claim of his. I hear of such situations again and again from other people where teachers are trying to prevent people from speaking AE by teaching, threatening or blackmailing them although there is nothing in their laws telling that one version of the English language is to be considered more important than the other.



I´ve never made that experience. At our university there was just the rule that your speech should be consistent in spelling and to a certain degree in pronounciation.
On the other hand there must be some rules to use a standard language if you teach or learn it. If you would learn Cockney with all that rhyming and stuff the majority of native English speaker probably won´t understand you. 
Or if you learn German pronounciation in Switzerland then a lot of Germans would not understand you but the other way round it would work fine.


----------



## Sepia

Frank78 said:


> I´ve never made that experience. At our university there was just the rule that your speech should be consistent in spelling and to a certain degree in pronounciation.
> On the other hand there must be some rules to use a standard language if you teach or learn it. If you would learn Cockney with all that rhyming and stuff the majority of native English speaker probably won´t understand you.
> Or if you learn German pronounciation in Switzerland then a lot of Germans would not understand you but the other way round it would work fine.



Sure, but if somebody is well understood and has an excellent pronounciation within the standards of the version of the language he has settled for that is no good reason for giving him a lower score on his certificate than somebody speaking the type of BE that the teacher happens to be fond of and thus limiting his chances in getting a good job, or achieving any other goals in life. However, you see it time and time again that teachers are sneaking their own "laws" in through the back door and that is not OK. And we aren't talkng about the Eastenders or about some hillbilly accent - that indeed quite a few people have trouble understanding. We are among other things talking about standard pronounciation rules like you'll find them described in important and well known dictionaries like the ones that are accessible on this platform.


----------



## Mate

*Moderator note*:

Please address the thread topic in post #1


These are the questions that should be addressed in this thread:


> But why is it that Spanish speakers seem to have a similar accent when speaking English? I guess the obvious answer is they all speak the same language with more or less the same phonetic alphabet, but is there more to it?


Participants are kindly reminded to stay on topic or to open a new thread.

Thank you.


----------



## mally pense

Good point, but the title of the thread is "The accent of *non-native English speakers* when speaking English",  not of Spanish speakers. This title does appear to have changed at some point however..  which is confusing. The title as it currently stands does imply a wider discussion than just Spanish speakers though. It would be better if the title corresponded a little more closely with the scope of the discussion as laid down in the first post.


----------

