Accommodation Theory, Second-Language

The theory of linguistic accommodation was first discussed in the 1960s by Howard Giles and his colleagues. A social psychologist rather than a linguist, Giles declared that the foundation of accommodation theory lay in social psychological research on similarity attraction. He claimed, in essence, that because people both need and desire approval, it is common for individuals to induce others to evaluate them in a more positive light by reducing the dissimilarities between themselves and others. This results in speech accommodation, with a high probability that individuals are willing to adjust their speech behavior for the potential rewards that may accrue. Thus, according to the theory, when we talk with others, we unconsciously change our speech styles toward the styles our interlocutors use or admire.

Accommodation occurs in a wide variety of communication behaviors, including the speaker's accent, grammar, and vocabulary. Giles stated that accommodation may take place at the following levels when speakers compare their own speech with that of an interlocutor: speed of delivery (the speed at which one talks), pitch range (how high or low in frequency one's voice is), phonological variables (sounds used by the speaker), and vocabulary (the choice of words used). Accommodation differs according to the status of speaker and listener and is associated with power. For English language learners (ELLs), a primary reason for accommodation depends on the extent to which ELLs and immigrants want to be accepted into their host communities. If an individual moves to a new country and works at a new company, he or she would likely have a high need for social approval; thus, speaking style would be important.

Accommodation theory uses a social-psychological perspective to shed light on the relationship between social/situational factors and second-language (L2) use. It examines what social factors motivate the use of psycholinguistic choices. Studies regarding L2 learning have demonstrated that learners are sensitive to their interlocutors. For instance, ELLs tend to adapt their speech to their interlocutors by using more phonological variants. As a result, ELLs are likely to be more hesitant and briefer when addressing a listener with the same native language background as their own, and they are likely to be less prepared to negotiate any communication problems. Such a phenomenon occurs even during the early stages of learning, and learners seem to be aware of specific linguistic features that are seen as stereotypes about native speakers of the target language. ELLs are also more aware of their own identities as well as the conversation topic than are their native-speaker interlocutors. Native speakers are comfortable conversing in their first language, whereas ELLs tend never to forget that they are foreigners, especially when speaking a second tongue; that is, they realize that they do not sound like native speakers and therefore remain quiet during conversations. Likewise, this is true of the conversation topic. ELLs often feel they will sound “stupid” if they join a conversation with a native speaker when the topic is serious (philosophy, religion, war, etc.), and hence they might listen, but will not add to the conversation. Such sensitivity shows in their attitudes toward a certain topic, judging themselves as experts or nonexperts when comparing themselves with their native-speaker interlocutors. ELLs often report that they believe they are far too slow in speaking their L2 and that native speakers are unusually fast.

...