I think nonnative English students are fortunate because of the hi-tech that is around them. They can also take some courses with a native speaker in some private institutions. Before ten years ago, I wish I had a chance to have a chat with a native speaker. I bought a radio to listen to the BBC, but the wave was not good all the time. Then I used my uncle’s videotapes with activity book to do some exercises. Unfortunately, I noticed that the teachers who were in the videotapes were not native speakers. I used to go to Riyadh, which is 360 km to my town, to visit a native speaker. He was African American. After that the revolution of the satellite appeared followed by the revolution of the internet. That means the students, nowadays, have a better chance to speak and listen to the native speakers whenever they want.
From the reading I guess the author is right about the native speaker and how much they cost compared to the nonnative speaker. In my country, those who have the authority to import teachers from the world prefer the native speaker of English than the nonnative speaker even if the native speaker does not have the qualification as the nonnative speaker has. I assure that the proficiency is the value that we are looking for not the fluency. So what is wrong with a Saudi teacher who is competent in his field of study or any other nationality? The concept of the ‘native and nonnative speaker of English does not mean that one is better than the other.
No comments:
Post a Comment