With reference to two recent doctoral research projects on ELF, the present article examines the characterisation of language attitudes as either stable or variable evaluative phenomena, and provides a detailed account of methodological practices that may be favoured from each ontological position.The durability of language attitudes is more specifically conceptualised as a stable (but not enduring) construct directed to a linguistic phenomenon in one thesis, and as variable and emergent forms of evaluative social practice around a language-related issue in the other. With these two different approaches in conversation, the authors consider the extent to which stability and variability of language attitudes may be two sides of the same coin, and question whether it is safe to assume a priori the inferability of stable language attitudes from the observation of evaluative practice. This article evidences the need for ELF researchers working in this area to contemplate what and how it is being researched in the name of language attitudes while having awareness of possible alternatives in any given study. ResumenHaciendo referencia a dos tesis doctorales recientemente defendidas en el campo de ELF, este artículo examina la caracterización de la noción de actitudes lingüísticas como un fenómeno estable o variable, y da cuenta de las prácticas metodológicas que puedan ser preferidas por diferentes posiciones ontológicas. En concreto, la durabilidad de las actitudes lingüísticas es conceptualizada como un constructo estable (pero no permanente) que es dirigido hacia un fenómeno lingüístico en una tesis, y como una forma emergente y variable de práctica social evaluativa sobre un fenómeno lingüístico en la otra. Con estos dos enfoques en conversación, los autores consideran hasta qué punto la estabilidad y la variabilidad de las actitudes lingüísticas pueden ser dos caras de la misma moneda, e interrogan si es prudente asumir a priori la inferibilidad de actitudes lingüísticas estables a través de la observación de prácticas evaluativas. El artículo evidencia la necesidad que tienen investigadores en esta área de ELF de reflexionar sobre qué y cómo se investiga lo que llamamos actitudes lingüísticas.Palabras clave: actitudes lingüísticas; metodología; Inglés como Lengua Franca (o ELF por sus siglas en inglés)

No abstract

No abstract

As ELF scholars warn us against treating linguistic productions of “non-native” English speakers as “errors” when they are sociolinguistically driven variation, it is necessary to investigate how speakers in Expanding Circle settings conceptualise, label and experience such uses themselves. This paper reports a qualitative study of the metalinguistic and evaluative practices of university students in Chile, Mexico and Spain. It explores how they ascribe (un)desirable meanings to different ways of speaking English as an additional language (i. e. indexical relations), whether these symbolic associations are seen to influence students’ own linguistic use, and the extent to which such indexical relations are theorised as inherent in language form or as symbolic and negotiable (i. e. metasemiotic awareness). The analysis of more than 53 hours of elicited interview talk reveals a complex web of available social meaning relations and multidirectional accounts of the effects that such meanings have on students’ linguistic and semiotic practices. Although many students display awareness of the contextual variability of social meaning-making processes (Coupland. 2007. Style: Language variation and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), only a minority were able to directly challenge dominant indexical associations and stereotypical trait attributions. The findings underscore the need for English language teachers to understand their students’ semiotic goals and interpretative repertoires, firstly to avoid discriminating against sociolinguistically motivated variation in students’ English use and secondly, to provide them with additional tools to negotiate their position as speakers of English as an additional language. The paper also reflects on the implications that these findings have for how we explain variation and attitudinal ambivalence in ELF research.

No abstract