Accent modification as a raciolinguistic ideology: a commentary in response to Burda et al. (2022)

In this commentary, we collectively examine a recent article titled “Effectiveness of Intense Accent Modification Training with Refugees from Burma” by Burda et al. (2022). Whilst our response is aimed at revealing the theoretical and methodological shortcomings of Burda et al., it will also expose the raciolinguistic ideologies in accent modification and highlight the need for careful ethical considerations on vulnerable populations, such as refugees and asylum seekers

Dialect density in bilingual Puerto Rican Spanish-English speaking children

It is still largely unknown how the two phonological systems of bilingual chil-dren interact. In this exploratory study, we examine children\u27s use of dialect features to determine how their speech sound systems interact. Six monolingual Puerto Rican Spanish-speaking children and six bilingual Puerto Rican Spanish- English speaking children, ages 5-7 years, were included in the current study. Children\u27s single word productions were analyzed for (1) dialect density and (2) frequency of occurrence of dialect features (after Oetting & McDonald, 2002). Nonparametric statistical analyses were used to examine differences within and across language groups. Results indicated that monolinguals and bilinguals ex-hibited similar dialect density, but differed on the types of dialect features used. Findings are discussed within the theoretical framework of the Dual Systems Model (Paradis, 2001) of language acquisition in bilingual children

Gaps in framing and naming: commentary to a viewpoint on accent services

Purpose: In this commentary, we offer a critique of A Viewpoint on Accent Services: Framing and Terminology Matter (Grover et al., 2021). We argue that the authors’ proposal to rename and reframe accent modification lacks criticality, which actually hinders rather than advances the movement towards equitable, culturally sustaining, and emancipatory practices. Method: We offer an analysis of the shortfall between the authors’ calls for linguistic justice in A Viewpoint on Accent Services and the actual changes they proposed. We break down major gaps in criticality, reflexivity, practice, and vision and discuss their potential for undercutting meaningful progress as it relates to linguistic justice. Results: We found that the frameworks for the pursuit of equity, cultural-sustenance, and emancipatory practices were misrepresented in the article in such a way that suggests that these goals could be achieved through superficial changes in terminology and attitudes. A Viewpoint on Accent Services upholds a power-neutral frame of operation that does not address the deeper systemic forces that make accent modification problematic. The lack of criticality towards accent intervention fosters complacency towards real transformation. Conclusion: We advocate for a serious and critical interrogation of accent practices and commitment to an emancipatory practice that addresses linguistic discrimination above all else. We emphasize the need to decenter standardized languages and to co-envision linguistic liberation using critical methods in scholarship, pedagogy, clinical practice and policy