365
Smiljana Komar         DOI: 10.4312/linguistica.62.1-2.365-386
University of Ljubljana          
smiljana.komar@ff.uni-lj.si
ATTITUDES OF SLOVENE L2 SPEAKERS OF ENGLISH TO SIX 
NATIVE V ARIETIES OF ENGLISH
1
1 INTRODUCTION
Linguists have been interested in the attitudes towards the English language and Eng-
lish speakers ever since the second half of the 20
th
 century when the English language 
started being increasingly used for communication by more and more people around 
the world, which has gradually led to the present-day status of English as lingua franca 
or English as international language (EIL). This increased interest in learning English 
and using it in international settings has resulted in a large number of non-native va-
rieties of English which are nowadays commonly referred to as varieties of English 
as Lingua Franca (ELF). The linguistic studies of ELF are on increase and there have 
also been attempts for codification of ELF pronunciation (see Jenkins, 2000). The sup-
porters of ELF claim that because there are more than three quarters of English users 
in the world who are non-native speakers of English and use English to communicate 
with other non-native speakers of English the teaching goals should change particularly 
on the level of pronunciation: the key concept in teaching English pronunciation is 
international intelligibility and not acquiring a native-speaker accent (Walker & Low 
& Setter 2021). They make a clear distinction between English as a foreign language 
(EFL) – English taught to non-native speakers of English so that they can communicate 
with native speakers – and English as international language (EIL), also referred to as 
English as lingua franca (ELF) – English taught to non-native speakers so that they 
can communicate mainly with other non-native speakers in the global world (Walker 
& Low & Setter 2021: 33). 
Looking at this new status of English as lingua franca from the perspective of a 
non-native speaker who wants to learn English, an important question arises: which va-
riety of English to choose as a teaching and learning model – the once dominant British 
English or the more widely spread and omnipresent American English or even English 
as international language or lingua franca (EIL/ELF).
A large number of recent studies (see Lewandowski 2017; Carrie 2017; Ladegaard 
& Sachdev 2006; Rindal 2010) on attitudes towards English focusing on the attitudes 
of foreign speakers of English towards the two main standard varieties have reached 
the same conclusion: foreign learners of English are fond of American English because 
1 The author acknowledges the financial support from the Slovenian Research Agency (research core 
funding No. P6-0218).
Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   365 Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   365 5. 01. 2023   07:29:34 5. 01. 2023   07:29:34

366
it sounds more relaxed and friendly but prefer British English as a teaching model be-
cause it is more prestigious, correct, posh and beautiful.
The purpose of this paper is neither to discuss the advantages or disadvantages of 
EIL/ELF nor to prescribe the most appropriate variety for the teaching of English in 
the Slovene context. Our purpose is to find and analyse the attitudes of Slovene stu-
dents of English towards different varieties of English, not only the two main standard 
varieties (British and General American). It is the Slovene contribution to the studies 
of language attitudes towards the two standard English varieties (British English – RP, 
and General American - GA), as well as four other native varieties of English (Scottish 
English - ScE, Irish English - IrE, Australian English - AusE and New Zealand English 
- NZE). The main reason for the addition of ScE, IrE, AusE and NZE to the study is to 
test how these four less familiar varieties are perceived by Slovene students of English. 
The results of the study may serve as an indicator for future teaching of English varie-
ties at the university level.
The paper is structured as follows: section 2 presents theoretical background on lan-
guage attitudes; section 3 presents the study of Slovene university students of English 
towards six native varieties of English; section 4 details the results of the questionnaire 
and section 5 is the discussion of the results.
2 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
2.1 Language Attitudes
The main purpose of studies on language attitudes is to analyse different evaluative 
reactions to languages and language varieties which are held by different groups of 
people. In other words, language attitudes are feelings that people have about their 
own language or about a foreign language. Studying language attitudes isolated from 
a larger context of interaction is practically impossible since they always reflect social 
categorization and cultural stereotypes. Understanding language attitudes as evalua-
tive beliefs, we have to take into consideration that they can either refer to a language 
variety or to a speaker of that variety. As pointed out by Dragojevic et al. (2021: 62), 
“beliefs about language structure correlate strongly with beliefs about speakers’ status, 
whereas beliefs about language sound correlate strongly with beliefs about speakers’ 
solidarity.” In other words, a competent or well-educated speaker (status) is someone 
whose language is well-structured on all linguistic levels and conforms to the context 
in which it is used. On the other hand, a speaker of a soft-sounding language is often 
regarded as warm and kind (solidarity). 
Most studies on language attitudes have focused on different language varieties 
– standard varieties, regional varieties, ethnic and social group varieties, as well as 
foreign varieties of a particular language – and the evaluation of speakers who use 
them. The findings suggest a close correlation between socio-economic dominance of 
speakers and high prestige of the linguistic variety they use (Milroy & Milroy 1999). 
Furthermore, speakers of high prestige varieties are regularly rated more favourably 
than speakers of low prestige varieties. All this leads to the creation of numerous ste-
reotypes about speakers of different linguistic varieties. 
Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   366 Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   366 5. 01. 2023   07:29:34 5. 01. 2023   07:29:34

367
In the context of foreign language teaching, prestigious varieties are the target teach-
ing and learning varieties. This is the case with English but also with other languages, 
such as Spanish. Ortiz Jiménez (2019) has studied the attitudes of teachers of Spanish 
as a foreign language in Spain and in Australia towards eight varieties of Spanish. She 
has found out that although the teachers exhibit a lot of tolerance and positive attitudes 
towards all eight varieties of Spanish, they value the standard Castilian (Peninsular) 
Spanish as the most prestigious, whereas Andalusian and Caribbean varieties of Span-
ish are least prestigious. She concludes that L2 teachers of Spanish should encourage 
the linguistic diversity instead of insisting on the hierarchical approach which puts the 
Castilian Spanish on the top of the scale and regards it as the only acceptable norm.
Most studies on language attitudes have employed the mentalist approach which 
views attitudes as an “internal state of readiness, which when aroused by stimulation of 
some sort will affect the responses of the individual” (McKenzie 2010: 21). According 
to the mentalist approach, attitudes have a tripartite structure. It consists of cognitive, 
affective and conative components. Cognitive components of an attitude are thoughts 
and beliefs that an individual has about the entity
2
 under inspection and may lead to the 
construction of stereotypes. Affective components of an attitude are feelings and emo-
tional responses that an individual has about the entity under evaluation. The conative 
components of an attitude reveal an individual’s behavioural tendencies or a predisposi-
tion to behave in a certain way towards the entity. The main advantage of the mentalist 
tripartite model is that it tries to explain ambivalent attitudes that people have towards 
a language variety or speakers of a particular variety. This ambivalence results from 
inconsistency or conflict among the three component elements of the model (McKenzie 
2010: 24). 
The seminal work on language attitudes was a study by Lambert, Hodgson, Gard-
ner and Fillenbaum (1960) who exposed French and English-speaking Canadians to 
recordings in both languages and asked them to evaluate the speakers according to 
different traits (physical, mental and emotional). Their method of research has become 
known as matched guise technique whose main principle is to use the same speaker 
producing two (or more) different varieties as authentically as possible with the evalu-
ators not knowing that they are listening to the same speaker. The purpose of the study 
was to elicit prejudices towards the two languages and their speakers. Their study, as 
well as a number of other studies which followed and used the matched guise tech-
nique, have come to the same conclusion: people are able to recognise and differentiate 
among language varieties and they also have stereotyped attitudes towards them. 
2.2 Attitudes Towards English 
Studies on the attitudes towards English varieties are numerous and can be divided into 
three groups: studies which investigate the attitudes of L1 English speakers towards 
varieties of English; and studies which examine the attitudes of L2 English speakers 
2 The term entity refers to a language variety in the most general sense, that is from standard to non-
standard varieties, from regional varieties to sociolects. 
Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   367 Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   367 5. 01. 2023   07:29:34 5. 01. 2023   07:29:34

368
towards different varieties of English; and studies in which participants, native and 
non-native speakers of English, evaluate their attitudes to English as Lingua Franca 
(ELF). 
The findings of the studies which investigate the attitudes of L1 English speak-
ers to varieties of English show that the English accents which are more associated 
with standard English are favoured in prestige and attractiveness, whereas some ur-
ban UK working-class vernaculars and ethnic minorities’ accents are awarded less 
prestige (Coupland and Bishop 2007; Levon et al. 2020). In addition, speakers of 
standard varieties are more competent, intelligent and have better jobs, while speak-
ers of non-standard varieties tend to be friendly, warm and trustworthy. The partici-
pants in most studies are adults of different age who have already developed certain 
stereotypical attitudes towards different language varieties
3
. Coupland and Bishop 
(2007) and Levon et al. (2020) all observe that younger participants exhibit more 
tolerance towards non-standard varieties than the older ones. Hiraga (2005) examines 
the attitudes of the British towards six varieties of English in the USA and Britain 
and finds that the standard American – also referred to as Network American – has 
a special status among British people. The variety gaines high scores in status and 
solidarity dimensions, whereas Received Pronunciation (RP) gaines high scores only 
in the dimension of status. Interestingly, the British express equally negative attitudes 
towards urban American and urban British varieties. Hirago (2005, 306) concludes 
that “what is important for British people is how ‘prestigious’ the variety is”, and not 
who the speakers are. 
Studies which examine the attitudes of L2 speakers towards English are numerous 
and focus mainly on the two standard varieties of English: Received Pronunciation 
(RP) and General American (GA). The participants in these studies are mainly students 
of English and the researchers try to explain their attitudes in the wider scope of teach-
ing English as a foreign language (see Lewandowski 2017, Carrie 2017, Ladegaard 
& Sachdev 2006, Rindal 2010). The results of these studies suggest that RP is profes-
sional and prestigious, whereas GA is urban and informal. On the other hand, a recent 
study by Barrata & Halenko (2022) on attitudes towards regional British accents in 
EFL teaching shows that although the teachers’ regional accents are difficult to under-
stand, they are nonetheless appreciated by the learners who find the accents amusing 
and inspiring. 
More recent studies on the topic of language attitudes of L2 speakers research not 
only the two main standard varieties of English but also English as Lingua Franca (ELF) 
(see Stanojević & Josipović Smojver 2011, Stanojević, Kabalin Borenić & Josipović 
Smojver 2012, Groom 2012, Kaur 2014). The results obtained in these studies show 
that L2 learners of English give priority to standard English varieties, find them better 
and more appropriate for teaching and learning English than ELF. 
3 The study by Kinzler and DeJesus (2013) has found that children develop stereotypical attitudes 
towards different American accents around the age of ten and tend to keep them as they grow up. 
Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   368 Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   368 5. 01. 2023   07:29:34 5. 01. 2023   07:29:34

369
2.3 Slovene Studies 
The tradition of learning English in Slovenia is long. English courses were officially in-
troduced in secondary schools immediately after the World War II (1945/1946) when it 
was taught alongside with French and Russian, whereas their introduction in elementa-
ry school curricula followed five years later in 1950. (Skela 2019: 14). Since 1955 Eng-
lish has been taught as the first or second foreign language in secondary schools (Skela 
& Sešek 2012: 65). Since then, the popularity and the desire to learn and speak English 
have been conditioned by the economic, political, technical and cultural changes in 
Europe and the world. Today, English is the first foreign language whose instruction 
begins in the beginning of elementary school (learners at the age of 6) and continues 
throughout the secondary school.
The English proficiency level for secondary school graduates is B2 according to 
the Common European Framework of Reference (Council of Europe 2001; henceforth 
CEFR). This level of proficiency is targeted in the secondary school curriculum for 
English. The learners are required to understand and use one standard variety of Eng-
lish (Eržen et al. 2008) – in Slovenia, this variety has traditionally been the British 
standard variety, commonlly referred to as Received Pronunciation (RP). The second-
ary school graduates who want to study English at the university level have to pass the 
national examination (Slo. matura) – no special entrance examination is required.
In agreement with the legislation, the instruction of foreign languages and litera-
tures at the university level in Slovenia is carried out in the foreign language. Hence 
the instruction at the English department, Faculty of Arts, University of Ljubljana is in 
BA and MA programmes English. The curriculum of the BA programme consists of a 
number of language and literature lectures, seminars and practical classes. The courses 
are taught mainly by Slovene lecturers whose English proficiency level is C2 according 
to CEFR
4
. The exposure of students to different varieties of English mainly depends 
on the course. For example, in lectures and practical classes on English phonetics and 
phonology (1
st
 year BA programme) and English prosody (2
nd
 year, BA programme) 
the students are systematically made aware of the differences between the standard 
British English pronunciation features and General American, as well as other regional 
varieties within the United Kingdom and beyond. 
Studies analysing the attitudes of Slovene learners of English towards different L1 
English varieties are practically non-existent. There is one study by Šabec (2000) in 
which she analyses the attitudes of students of English at the University of Maribor 
towards British and American English. Her findings are similar to the findings of the 
above-mentioned studies (see 2.2): British English is “more sophisticated, more dif-
ficult to pronounce and more complex than AmE, which is, …, simpler, easier and 
sounds more natural and familiar” (2000: 75). Furthermore, Received Pronunciation is 
considered a model for pronunciation, prestigious, desirable and useful whereas Ameri-
can English is viewed as relaxed by the majority of respondents (2000: 76). 
4 Currently, there are three native English lecturers who teach in the department: two are native 
speakers of British English and teach language courses, one is a native speaker of Canadian English 
who teaches Canadian literature. 
Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   369 Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   369 5. 01. 2023   07:29:34 5. 01. 2023   07:29:34

370
Stopar (2015: 113) looks into the stereotypes that students of English at the University 
of Ljubljana hold towards Americans. The respondents mention five adjectives that are 
most representative of Americans: patriotic, materialistic, ambitious, competitive and ig-
norant, of which only materialistic and ignorant are negatively evaluated, the remaining 
three have either neutral (patriotic) or positive (ambitious and competitive) evaluations.
3 THE STUDY
3.1 Participants
Sixty-five Slovene students enrolled in the 2
nd
 and 3
rd
 year of the BA university pro-
gramme in English language and literature at the Department of English, Faculty of 
Arts, University of Ljubljana participated in the testing, which was carried out in May 
2022. Their average age was 21.8. Fifty-five students were female (84.6%) and 10 stu-
dents were male (15.4%). These percentages are in agreement with the gender structure 
of students of English at the department. The years of learning English ranged from 12 
to 17, the average being 12.8, which corresponds to the years of learning English in 
schools (elementary and secondary) in Slovenia for this generation of students
5
. None 
of the participants lived or spent a longer period of time in an English speaking country, 
and none of them had native speakers of English as parents. 
 
3.2 Instruments and Procedure
The participants were presented with a three-part questionnaire. In the first part, they 
had to provide information about their nationality, gender, age, years of learning Eng-
lish, time spent in an English-speaking country and if the native language of their par-
ents was English. 
In the second part, they were requested to rate, on a four-point Likert scale, three 
statements about the cognitive and affective traits of the speaker, and two statements 
concerning the linguistic traits which they believed contributed most to their attitudes 
to a particular variety. The range of scores was: strongly disagree (1), disagree (2), 
agree (3), strongly agree (4). The last task was to recognize the variety in question. The 
tasks in the second part of the questionnaire were the same for all six varieties. 
In the third part of the questionnaire, the respondents had to range the six tested 
varieties according to their preference, familiarity and appropriateness for teaching to 
Slovene learners of English.
For the execution of the second part of the questionnaire a verbal guise technique 
(VGT) was used. VGT is a modification of the classic MGT (matched guise technique) 
in that it uses multiple speakers to provide sound recordings of either read or sponta-
neous speech instead of only one bilingual speaker usually reading a prepared text in 
their native varieties. Although VGT has received some criticism (see Chan 2021), it 
has made its way into modern studies on World Englishes and attitudes towards them. 
For our study we employed six different speakers reading the same text in their native 
5 Since the school year 2016/2017 learning English has been introduced in the 2
nd
 year of the elemen-
tary school.
Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   370 Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   370 5. 01. 2023   07:29:34 5. 01. 2023   07:29:34

371
English variety. The audio clips for the six tested varieties were obtained from the 
International Dialects of English Archive (IDEA – International Dialects of English 
Archive (dialectsarchive.com). All the speakers were female and they read the first two 
paragraphs of the text Comma Gets a Cure which is the text used by IDEA for examin-
ing the pronunciation of different varieties of English spoken around the world. The 
text was written by Jill McCullough and Barbara Somerville and edited by Douglas N. 
Honorof (Comma Gets A Cure | IDEA: International Dialects of English Archive (dia-
lectsarchive.com). The audio clips of the six varieties were each one minute long and 
were presented to the respondents in the following order: AusE English (AusE) – the 
speaker was from Sydney, General American (GA), ScE English (ScE) – the speaker 
was from Edinburgh, Received Pronunciation (RP), NZE English (NZE) – the speaker 
was from South Auckland and IrE English (IrE) – the speaker was from Dublin. After 
each audio clip, the respondents were asked to rate the statements presented in the sec-
ond part of the questionnaire and to recognize the variety in question. 
Having heard and rated all six varieties, the respondents moved to the third part of 
the questionnaire. The whole testing lasted 20 minutes.
3.3 Research Questions
The purpose of our study was to answer the below four research questions:
RQ1: Which cognitive, affective and aesthetic traits are most frequently associated 
with a variety under investigation?
RQ2: What is the correlation between the pronunciation features and intelligibility 
of a variety under investigation?
RQ3: Is there a correlation between the familiarity with a variety and its recognition?
RQ4: Is there a correlation between the preference, familiarity and appropriateness 
for teaching the tested varieties to Slovene learners of English?
4 RESULTS 
4.1 Evaluation of Cognitive Traits
In order to test the cognitive traits attributed to a variety, the respondents had to decide 
if the speakers sounded: friendly, boring, well-educated, confident and serious. Sum-
ming up the strongly disagree and disagree categories in disagreement (D), as well as 
strongly agree and agree in agreement (A), provided a more general picture of the re-
spondents’ evaluations as positive or negative. Where significant, the strongly disagree 
and strongly agree scores were provided.
All respondents evaluated the speakers of all varieties as friendly with ScE and 
IrE ranking at the top of the scale (96.9%). There is a difference between them in the 
number of strong agreements (ScE 60%, IrE 47.7%). Following ScE and IrE, are GA 
(92.3%), NZE (89.2%), RP (87.6%) and AusE (53.8%). 
The respondents also agreed that all speakers sounded confident with GA scoring 
highest (98.4%) and immediately followed by RP (95.3%). The remaining varieties 
followed: ScE (76.8%), IrE (67.7%), NZE (64.6%) and AusE (63%).
Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   371 Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   371 5. 01. 2023   07:29:34 5. 01. 2023   07:29:34

372
The respondents evaluated the speakers of five varieties as well-educated. The 
speaker of RP scored highest (96.9%), followed by the speaker of GA (86.1%). The 
speakers of ScE (63%), AusE (61%) and IrE (57%) were regarded as well-educated but 
to a smaller degree. Interestingly, the speaker of NZE sounded not well-educated in the 
opinion of 86.2% respondents of whom 47.7 % strongly disagreed with the statement 
that the speaker sounded well-educated.
Five varieties were not regarded as boring with IrE being at the top of the scale 
(95.4%), closely followed by GA and ScE (90.7% both), NZE (86.2%) and lastly RP 
(79.9%). The speaker of AusE was recognized as boring by 63% of respondents.
As to the seriousness of the speakers, the results are more divided. The speakers of 
AusE English (82.5%) and RP (70.7%) were evaluated as serious, whereas the speak-
ers of the remaining four varieties were not. The least serious was the speaker of GA 
(70.7%), followed by the NZE (63%), ScE (58.2%) and IrE (52.3%) speakers. Table 1 
presents the ranking of the varieties in terms of disagreement and agreement regarding 
the five cognitive traits.
Table 1. Cognitive traits: “The speaker of this clip sounds …”
friendly boring
well-
educated
confident serious
D IrE (95.4%)
GA (90.7%)
ScE (90.7%)
NZE (86.2%)
RP (79.9%)
NZE (86.2%) GA(70.7%)
NZE (63%)
ScE (58.4%)
IrE (52.3%)
A ScE (96.9%)
IrE (96.9%)
GA (92.3%)
NZE (89.2%)
RP (87.6%)
AusE (53.8%)
AusE (63%) RP (96.9%)
GA (86.1%)
ScE (63%)
AusE (61%)
IrE (57%)
GA (98.4%)
RP (95.3%)
ScE (76.8%)
IrE (67.7%)
NZE (64.6%)
AusE (63%)
AusE (82.5%)
RP (70.7%)
4.2 Evaluation of Affective Traits
With the purpose of evaluating affective traits that the varieties triggered, the respond-
ents had to evaluate the statement: “When I listen to this speaker, I trust her/like her/
fell irritated/am amused/feel intimidated”. Similarly, as with the results of cognitive 
traits, we summed up both positive and negative scores into disagreement and agree-
ment, respectively.
All the respondents trusted the six speakers. The most trustworthy was the ScE 
speaker (93.8%), closely followed by the IrE speaker (90.8%) and the speaker of GA 
(90.7%). Speakers of RP (84.6%), NZE (78.5%) and AusE (63%) ranked in the second 
half of the scale.
Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   372 Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   372 5. 01. 2023   07:29:34 5. 01. 2023   07:29:34

373
Similarly, all the respondents liked all six speakers. Most liked were the speak-
ers of GA and ScE (both 90.7%), the difference between them being in the percent-
age of agreement (GA 46.2%, ScE 27.7%) and strong agreement (GA 44.6%, ScE 
63.1%). The speakers of the remaining varieties followed: IrE (89.2%), NZE (83.1%), 
RP (80%) and AusE (50.7%).
None of the respondents found the speakers irritating. Least irritating was the speak-
er of ScE (95.4%), followed by the speaker of RP (93.8%), the speaker of GA (93.7%), 
the IrE speaker (89.2%), the speaker of NZE (86.2%) and the speaker of AusE (70.8%).
Similarly, none of the respondents felt intimidated by the speakers with the speakers 
of GA and IrE at the top of the scale (both 98.5%), the difference between them being 
in the percentage of strong agreement (GA 86.2%, IrE 78.5%). The speakers who fol-
lowed were from New Zealand and Scotland (both 96.9%), with the difference in strong 
disagreement (NZE 83.1%), ScE 75.4%). The last two on the scale were speakers of RP 
(81%) and AusE (80%). 
The fifth affective trait referred to the amusing quality of the variety where the re-
spondents scored between 50% and 75% either in agreement or disagreement with the 
statement. Nonetheless, the respondents found speakers of two varieties as amusing: 
the ScE speaker (63%) and the speaker of GA (55.3%). The speakers of the remaining 
four varieties were not found amusing. The respondents were least amused with the 
speaker of AusE (75%), followed by the speakers of RP (67.7%), IrE (60%) and NZE 
(50.8%). The ranking of the varieties in terms of disagreement and agreement regarding 
the five affective traits is presented in Table 2.
Table 2. Affective traits: “When I listen to this speaker, I …”
trust her like her feel irritated am amused feel intimidated
D ScE (95.4%)
RP (93.8%)
GA (93.7%)
IrE (89.2%)
NZE (86.2%)
AusE (70.8%)
AusE (75%)
RP (67.7%)
IrE (60%)
NZE (50.8%)
GA (98.5%)
IrE (98.5%)
NZE (96.9%)
ScE (96.9%)
RP (81%)
AusE (80%)
A ScE (93.8%)
IrE (90.8%)
GA (90.7%)
RP (84.6%)
NZE (78.5%)
AusE (63%)
GA (90.7%)
ScE (90.7%)
IrE (89.2%)
NZE (83.1%)
RP (80%)
AusE (50.7%)
ScE (63%)
GA (55.3%)
4.3 Evaluation of Aesthetic Traits
For the evaluation of aesthetic traits of the six varieties (RQ3), the respondents had to 
decide if the accent was beautiful, posh, prestigious, old-fashioned and funny.
Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   373 Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   373 5. 01. 2023   07:29:34 5. 01. 2023   07:29:34

374
The results indicate that none of the varieties was regarded as old-fashioned. The 
respondents all disagreed that GA was old-fashioned (83.1% of them strongly disa-
greed). The varieties which followed were: NZE (89.3%), IrE (75.4%), ScE (72.3%), 
RP (64.6%) and AusE (60%).
The respondents agreed that the only prestigious variety was RP (78.5%). The re-
maining five varieties were not prestigious, with ScE being at the top of the scale with 
93.8% of which 57% represented strong disagreement. Varieties which followed were 
AusE (92.3%), IrE (90.8%), NZE (87.8%) and GA (83.1%).
Similarly as above, the respondents agreed that only RP was posh (86.2%). The 
rest of the varieties were not, with NZE and ScE at the top of the scale (both 89.2%), 
the difference between them in the percentage of strong disagreement (NZE 53.8%, 
ScE 67.7%). GA (87.7%), IrE and AusE (both 77%) scored in the second half of the 
scale.
The respondents regarded five varieties as beautiful, with RP scoring highest 
(89.2%), and being followed by ScE (77%). Varieties which followed were NZE 
(69.2%), IrE (67.9%) and GA (60%). The scores for AusE were 10.8% of strong disa-
greement and 44.6% of disagreement (together 55.4%), and 41.5% of agreement and 
3.1% of strong agreement (together 44.6%), which places AusE by a margin into the 
category of not being beautiful.
The respondents found five varieties as not funny: RP (93.8%), GA (89.3%), AusE 
(77.9%), IrE (72.3%) and NZE (70.8%). The only variety which was marginally funny 
was ScE (52.3%). Table 3 presents the ranking of the varieties in terms of disagreement 
and agreement regarding the five aesthetic traits.
Table 3. Aesthetic traits: “This accent is …”
beautiful posh prestigious old-fashioned funny
D AusE (55.4%) NZE (89.2%)
ScE (89.2%)
GA (87.7%
IrE (77%)
AusE (77%)
ScE (93.8%)
AusE (92.3%)
IrE (90.8%)
NZE (87.8%)
GA (83.1%)
GA (100%)
NZE (89.3%)
IrE (75.4%)
ScE (72.3%)
RP (64.6%)
AusE (60%)
RP (93.8%)
GA (89.3%)
AusE (77.9%)
IrE (72.3%)
NZE (70.8%)
A RP (89.2%)
ScE (77%)
NZE (69.2%)
IrE (67.9%)
GA (60%)
RP (86.2%) RP (78.5%) ScE (52.3%)
4.4 Evaluation of Linguistic Traits
Questions 4 and 5 in the questionnaire tested the participants’ awareness of pho -
netic and prosodic features which ease or hinder the understanding of the variety 
under investigation. In question 4 they had to evaluate the statement, “I find the 
Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   374 Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   374 5. 01. 2023   07:29:34 5. 01. 2023   07:29:34

375
pronunciation easy/intonation familiar/rhythm difficult. They found the pronuncia-
tion of all varieties except ScE easy, the intonation of all varieties, with the excep -
tion of NZE and IrE, familiar, and the rhythm of all varieties not difficult at all. 
Table 4 presents the ranking of the varieties according to the percentage of scores 
showing agreement in cases of pronunciation and intonation and disagreement in 
the case of rhythm. It has to be pointed out that in case of GA and RP the respond -
ents’ prevailing scores were strong agreement in the categories of pronunciation 
(GA 98.5%, RP 72.3%) and intonation (GA 95.3%, RP 70.8%), and strong disa -
greement with the category of rhythm being difficult (GA 87.7%, RP 75.4%). For 
the remaining varieties the respondents opted mostly for the scores of agreement 
and disagreement. The only three varieties whose pronunciation and intonation the 
respondents did not find easy or familiar were ScE (pronunciation), as well as NZE 
and IrE (intonation).
Table 4. Linguistic features: “I find …
pronunciation easy intonation familiar rhythm difficult
D ScE (35.4%) NZE (61.5%)
IrE (52.4%)
GA (95.4%)
RP (89.2%)
AusE (75.4%)
ScE (73.9%)
NZE (57%)
IrE (50.8%)
A GA (98.5%)
RP (96.9%)
AusE (78.5%)
NZE (66.2%)
IrE (53.8%)
RP (98.5%)
GA (98.5%)
AusE (67.7%)
ScE (60%)
Question 5 required the respondents to evaluate the reasons for the lack of intelli-
gibility of the speakers. The given categories were vowels, consonants, speed, rhythm 
and melody. Most of the respondents disagreed that the five categories had hindered 
intelligibility of GA and RP. Similarly as with question 4, they chose strong disagree-
ment for GA vowels (87.7%), consonants (89.2%), speed (49.2%), rhythm (78.5%) 
and melody (73.8%), as well as for RP vowels (70.8%), consonants (70.8%), speed 
(55.4%), rhythm (61.5%) and melody (64.6%). Table 5 presents the scores that re-
spondents attributed to the five pronunciation categories which hinder or ease the intel-
ligibility of the varieties.
Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   375 Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   375 5. 01. 2023   07:29:34 5. 01. 2023   07:29:34

376
Table 5. Linguistic features: “The reasons for the lack of intelligibility of this speaker are …”
vowels consonants speed rhythm melody
D GA (95.4%)
RP (84.6%)
GA (93.8%)
RP (90.8%)
AusE (77%)
NZE (75.4%)
IrE (55.4%)
GA (81.5%)
ScE (80%)
RP (73.9%)
AusE (70.8%)
GA (95.4%)
RP (87.7%)
AusE 61.5%)
ScE (60%)
GA (92.3%)
RP (92.3%)
IrE (57%)
ScE (55.4%)
A ScE (76.9%)
NZE (63.1%)
IrE (61.5%)
AusE (57%)
ScE (52.3%) IrE (63.1%)
NZE (50.8%)
IrE (52.3%)
NZE (50.8%)
AusE (55.3%)
NZE (52.3%)
4.5 Recognition of the Varieties
Task 6 in the questionnaire required the respondents to recognize the variety under 
investigation. The respondents were most successful in the recognition of GA (95.4%) 
and RP (95.4%). ScE and IrE were recognized by only a half of the respondents (ScE 
50.8%, IrE 55.4%), whereas the rest of them confused them: IrE was recognized as ScE 
(32.3%), and ScE as IrE (47.7%). Similar was true with NZE and AusE. The former 
was correctly recognized by 49.2% and confused with AusE by 43.1% of respondents, 
whereas the latter was correctly recognized by 40% and confused with NZE by 35% of 
respondents. Table 6 presents the results for the recognition of the varieties.
Table 6. Recognition of the varieties
AusE GA ScE RP NZE IrE
AusE 40% 6.2% 13.8% 35% 5%
GA 95.4% 4.6%
ScE 1.5% 50.8% 47.7%
RP 4.6% 95.4%
NZE 43.1% 7.7% 49.2%
IrE 12.3% 32.3% 55.4%
4.6 Popularity, Familiarity and Appropriateness for Teaching
In the third part of the questionnaire, the respondents had to rank the six varieties 
of English according to their popularity, familiarity and appropriateness for teaching 
English to Slovene learners. The respondents found RP most favourite variety, as well 
as most appropriate for teaching English to Slovene learners. On the other hand, they 
were most familiar with GA. Least favourite, familiar and appropriate varieties were 
NZE and ScE. Table 7 presents the rankings of the varieties according to the above 
categories. 
Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   376 Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   376 5. 01. 2023   07:29:34 5. 01. 2023   07:29:34

377
Table 7. Popularity, familiarity and appropriateness for teaching
popularity familiarity
appropriateness
for teaching
rank variety mode rank variety mode rank variety mode
1. RP 2.5 1. GA 1.5 1. RP 1.4
2. IrE 3.0 2. RP 1.7 2. GA 1.8
3. AusE 3.4 3. AusE 3.8 3. AusE 3.7
4. GA 3.6 4. IrE 4.2 4. IrE 4.2
5. ScE 3.7 5. ScE 4.6 5. ScE 4.8
6. NZE 4.7 6. NZE 5.3 6. NZE 5.0
5 DISCUSSION
The results of the study indicate that some cognitive, affective and aesthetic traits were 
more frequently associated with some varieties than with others (RQ1). Table 8 pre-
sents the selection of most frequently scored cognitive, affective and aesthetic traits in 
the six studied varieties. 
Table 8. Association of the cognitive, affective and aesthetic traits with different varieties
variety cognitive traits affective traits aesthetic traits
RP friendly
most well-educated
confident
serious
trustworthy
liked
not amusing
most beautiful
posh
prestigious
not old-fashioned
not funny at all
GA friendly
well-educated
confident
not serious at all
least boring
trustworthy
most liked
amusing
least beautiful
not posh
not prestigious
not old-fashioned
not funny
IrE very friendly
least boring
marginally well-educat-
ed
marginally confident
trustworthy
liked
not amusing
not posh
not prestigious
not old-fashioned
not funny
Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   377 Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   377 5. 01. 2023   07:29:34 5. 01. 2023   07:29:34

378
ScE most friendly
least boring
not serious
most trustworthy
most liked
amusing
beautiful
not posh
least prestigious
not old-fashioned
funny
AusE least friendly
boring
not well-educated
least confident
serious
least trustworthy
least liked
not amusing
not beautiful
not posh
least prestigious
not old-fashioned
not funny
NZE friendly
not boring
not well-educated
not serious
trustworthy
liked
not amusing
least posh
not prestigious
not old-fashioned
We can conclude that the speakers of all varieties sounded friendly, confident, trust-
worthy and were liked. None of the speakers irritated or intimidated the respondents. 
As far as the aesthetic traits are concerned, the respondents agreed that none of the 
varieties was old-fashioned. RP was the only variety which they found prestigious and 
posh, but also the most beautiful one. Surprisingly, GA, on the other hand, was evalu-
ated just the opposite: neither posh nor prestigious but also not beautiful. Interestingly, 
ScE was the only variety which the respondents found funny. Analysing the scores as-
sociated with AusE, we can observe rather negative attitudes to the variety in all three 
categories of traits. There are two possible explanations for this: first, the AusE speaker 
read the text in a very slow rhythm and flat intonation, and second, the respondents may 
have been least familiar with the AusE variety.
The results also indicate that there is a correlation between cognitive, affective and 
aesthetic traits associated with some of the varieties. The speaker of RP was serious, did 
not trigger amusement in the respondents, and the variety was not funny. The speaker of 
ScE English was most friendly, least boring and not serious, as well as most trustworthy 
and liked. The ScE variety, although not posh and least prestigious, was rated beautiful 
and funny. As stated above, respondents were also consistent in evaluating, rather nega-
tively, AusE English. We can find consistency among cognitive, affective and aesthetic 
traits also with NZE and IrE English, which received similar scores in all three catego -
ries of traits. There is also a correlation between cognitive and affective traits that the 
speaker of GA received – the respondents found her friendly, well-educated, confident, 
not serious and least boring, as well as trustworthy, most liked and amusing. There is lit -
tle correlation between cognitive and affective traits on the one hand, and aesthetic traits 
on the other – the GA variety was found least beautiful, not posh or prestigious, and not 
funny. At this point it is difficult to find an explanation for such a discrepancy, yet the 
most plausible one could be that the respondents evaluated the appeal of the speaker with 
cognitive and affective traits, and followed their pre-established, perhaps stereotypical 
opinion about GA variety when evaluating its aesthetic traits.
Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   378 Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   378 5. 01. 2023   07:29:34 5. 01. 2023   07:29:34

379
The purpose of our study was also to find out if the participants were aware of the 
linguistic features which ease or hinder understanding of a particular variety (RQ2). 
First we checked their awareness of the difficulty of pronunciation, familiarity of into-
nation and difficulty of rhythm. The respondents found the three features of RP and GA 
easiest and most familiar – which was not surprizing as the two varieties are the ones 
they were most exposed to (through different media) and studied (particularly RP). As 
to other varieties, the pronunciation of ScE was difficult, intonation of NZE and IrE un-
familiar, and their rhythm rather difficult. We further asked the respondents to evaluate 
which of the five pronunciation features were responsible for the lack of intelligibility 
(vowels, consonants, speed, rhythm and melody). Similarly as above, none of the fea-
tures caused any intelligibility problems with RP and GA. Since the varieties exhibit 
most variation in the vocalic system, it was not surprizing to find the vowels hindering 
the intelligibility of ScE, NZE and IrE most. The consonants seem to have hindered 
intelligibility of ScE only. The three prosodic features (speed, rhythm and melody) af-
fected the intelligibility of IrE, NZE and AusE (only melody).
In our study we also wanted to find out if there was a correlation between the fa-
miliarity with a variety and its recognition (RQ3). The results suggested that the re-
spondents were most familiar with GA and RP (see Table 7), which they also correctly 
identified. They were less familiar with AusE, IrE, ScE and NZE but their correct rec-
ognition does not reflect this order. The two European varieties (ScE and IrE) were 
more correctly recognized than AusE and NZE. In addition, the most frequent faulty 
recognition – confusion of one variety with the other - occurred between IrE and ScE, 
as well as NZE and AusE. We can conclude that the least familiar variety is least cor-
rectly recognized.
Comparison of orders in which the respondents ranked the varieties according to 
their popularity, familiarity and appropriateness for teaching to Slovene learners (RQ4) 
shows that the most favourite variety and the most appropriate one for teaching is RP, 
whereas the most familiar variety is GA, immediately followed by RP (see Table 7) . 
It is interesting to find a correlation between the popularity of GA (ranked fourth) and 
the aesthetic value of beauty where GA was evaluated as least beautiful. The ranking 
of RP, GA, AusE and IrE on the first four places on all three scales is not surprizing 
and can be explained by the curriculum where students can attend literature and lan-
guage courses dealing with the four varieties. ScE and NZE are least familiar to the 
respondents and as such also least favourite and least appropriate for teaching English 
to Slovene learners of English.
6 CONCLUSION
The paper presents the results of a study on attitudes of Slovene university students of 
English towards six L1 varieties of English. The findings show that there is a correlation 
between cognitive, affective and aesthetic traits associated with most of the varieties, 
with the exception of GA, which although it is perceived as friendly, well-educated, 
confident, trustworthy and liked (affective and cognitive traits) it is also least beauti-
ful, not posh or prestigious and not funny (aesthetic traits). Similar to other studies, the 
Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   379 Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   379 5. 01. 2023   07:29:34 5. 01. 2023   07:29:34

380
participants find RP prestigious, most well-educated, beautiful, as well as trustworthy 
and liked. This is also the reason why most of them believe that RP is the right variety 
for teaching English to Slovene L2 learners. 
The study also shows that the participants are mainly aware of the pronunciation 
features which are responsible for (mis)understanding of an English variety. It seems 
that the recognition of a variety depends on how different it is from one of the two main 
standard varieties (RP or GA), as well as how much exposure to the variety in question 
the participants have had: less familiarity with a variety and more phonetic variation 
from the standard variety lead to a less successful recognition. This is an important 
finding which should also be considered from the pedagogical perspective. We believe 
that in the period of English as a global language university students should be taught 
to develop an objective and educated stance toward different standard and non-standard 
varieties of English, including English as Lingua Franca (ELF) or English as interna-
tional language (EIL). In practice this means that literary, linguistic and pedagogical 
courses should focus on specific features of all varieties of English and encourage stu-
dents to recognize them and take a stance towards them
6
. 
To substantiate our findings, additional research is necessary – for example, a study 
among different age and occupational groups of Slovene L2 speakers of English; it 
should address not only the two prevailing standard varieties of English (RP and GA) 
but also different ELF varieties. It would be interesting to find the attitudes of Slovene 
speakers of English as a foreign language towards the present trend to teach English as 
international language (EIL) or English as lingua franca (ELF) pronunciation instead 
of either of the two native standard pronunciations (RP and GA).
Primary sources
IDEA (International Dialects of English Archive) https://www.dialectsarchive.com/.
IDEA (international Dialects of English Archive), Australia https://www.dialect-
sarchive.com/australia-28.
IDEA (International Dialects of English Archive), General American https://www.dia-
lectsarchive.com/general-american-11. 
IDEA (International Dialects of English Archive), Ireland https://www.dialectsarchive.
com/ireland-7. 
IDEA (International Dialects of English Archive), New Zealand https://www.dialect-
sarchive.com/new-zealand-13. 
IDEA (International Dialects of English Archive), Received Pronunciation https://
www.dialectsarchive.com/received-pronunciation-4.
IDEA (International Dialects of English Archive), Scotland https://www.dialect-
sarchive.com/scotland-25. 
6 For example, when studying the poetry of the Scottish romantic poet Robert Burns, who wrote in the 
Scots language and Scottish English, students can be encouraged to discuss the language and to un -
derstand the motivation behind its usage. There are plenty of recordings of his poetry available on the 
Internet read in the Scottish English which the students can listen to and discuss the linguistic features.
Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   380 Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   380 5. 01. 2023   07:29:34 5. 01. 2023   07:29:34

381
References
BARRATA, Alex/Nicola HALENKO (2022) “Attitudes toward regional British ac-
cents in EFL teaching: Student and teacher perspectives.” Linguistics and Educa-
tion 67, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2022.101018. 
CARRIE, Erin (2017) “British is professional, American is urban: attitudes towards 
English reference accents in Spain.” International Journal of Applied Linguistics 
27/2, doi:10.1111/ijal.12139.
CHAN, Ka Long Roy (2021) “Verbal guise test: Problems and solutions.” Academia 
Letters. Article 1493.
COUNCIL OF EUROPE (2001) Common European Framework of References for 
Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Cambridge University Press. https://
www.coe.int/en/web/common-european-framework-reference-languages/home. 
COUPLAND, Nikolas/Hywel BISHOP (2007) “Ideologised values for British ac-
cents.” Journal of Sociolinguistics 11(1), 74-93.
DRAGOJEVIC, Marko/Fabio FASOLI/Jennifer CRAMER/Tamara RAKIĆ (2021) 
“Toward a Century of Language Attitudes Research: Looking Back and Moving 
Forward.” Journal of Language and Social Psychology 40/1, 60-79. SAGE. doi: 
10.1177/0261927X20966714.
ERŽEN, Vineta/Alenka BUDIHNA/Berta KOGOJ/Blanka KLOBUČAR/Boštjan 
VRECL/Ingrid ZUPANC-VREČKO/Jelka NAPAST/Karmen PIŽORN/Katica 
SEMEC PEVEC (2008) Učni načrt. Angleščina. Gimnazija: splošna, klasična, 
strokovna gimnazija: obvezni ali izbirni predmet in matura (420 ur). Ministrstvo 
za šolstvo in šport, Zavod RS za šolstvo. Accessed October 15, 2022. http://epor-
tal.mss.edus.si/msswww/programi2018/programi/media/pdf/un_gimnazija/un_an-
glescina_gimn.pdf.
GROOM, Chloe (2012) “Non-native attitudes towards teaching English as a lin-
gua franca in Europe.” English Today 109, vol. 28 (1), 50-57, doi: 10.1017/
S026607841100068X.
HIRAGA, Yuko (2005) “British attitudes towards six varieties of English in the USA 
and Britain.” World Englishes 24/3, 289-308.
JENKINS, Jennifer (2000) The Phonology of English as International Language: New 
Models, New Norms, New Goals. Oxford University Press.
KAUR, Paramjit (2014) “Accent attitudes: Reactions to English as a lingua fran-
ca.” Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 123, 3-12, doi: 10.1016/j.
sbspro.2014.04.218.
KINZLER, Katherine D./Jasmine M DEJESUS (2013) “Northern = smart and 
Southern = nice: The development of accent attitudes in the United States.” 
The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 66 (6), 1146-1158, doi: 
10.1080/17470218.2012.731695.
LADEGAARD, Hans J./Itesh SACHDEV (2006) “ ‘I Like the Americans … But I 
Certainly Don’t Aim for an American Accent’: Language Attitudes, Vitality and 
Foreign Language Learning in Denmark.” Journal of Multilingual and Multicul-
tural Development 27 (2), 91-107, doi: 10.1080/01434630608668542. 
Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   381 Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   381 5. 01. 2023   07:29:34 5. 01. 2023   07:29:34

382
LAMBERT, Wallace E./Richard C. HODGSON/Robert C. GARDNER/Samuel FIL-
LENBAUM (1960) “Evaluational Reactions to Spoken Languages.” Journal of Ab-
normal and Social Psychology 60 (1), 44-51.
LEVON, Erez/Devyani SHARMA/Dominic W ATT/Christina PERRY (2020) Accent 
Bias in Britain: Attitudes to Accents in Britain and Applications for Fair Access. 
Queen Mary University of London & the University of York.
LEW ANDOWSKI, Marcin (2017) “The dimensions of learner attitudes to General 
British and General American: A survey-based study.” Poznan Studies in Contem-
porary Linguistics 53/2, 227-249.
MCKENZIE, Robert M. (2010) The Social Psychology of English as a Global Lan-
guage: Attitudes, Awareness and identity in the Japanese Context. Springer. doi: 
10.1007/978-90-481-8566-5.
MILROY, James/Milroy Lesley (2012) Authority in Language: Investigating Standard 
English. (4th ed.). Oxford: Routledge.
ORTIZ JIMÉNEZ, Macarena (2019) “Actitudes lingüísticas de los profesores de es-
pañol en España y Australia hacia las variedades dialectales.” Journal of Spanish 
language Teaching 6/2:182-198. https://doi.org/10.1080/23247797.2019.1668634 .
RINDAL, Ulrikke (2010) “Constructing identity with L2: Pronunciation and attitudes 
among Norwegian learners of English.” Journal of Sociolinguistics 14(2), 240-261.
SKELA, Janez/Urška SEŠEK (2012) “Od globalnih smernic do lokalnih kontekstov: 
učenje in poučevanje tujih jezikov v Sloveniji.” Jezik in slovstvo 57 (3-4), 63-82.
SKELA, Janez (2019) “Razvojni tokovi poučevanja in učenja angleščine v Sloveniji 
kot alegorija Guliverjevih potovanj v deželo velikanov in palčkov.” In: T. Balažic-
Bulc/J. Kenda/M. Lah/V. Požgaj-Hadži (eds), Poti in stranpoti poučevanja tujih 
jezikov. Znanstvena založba Filozofske fakultete Univerze v Ljubljani, 9-26, doi: 
STANOJEVIĆ, Mateusz-Milan/Višnja JOSIPOVIĆ SMOJVER (2011) “Euro-English 
and Croatian national identity: are Croatian university students ready for English as 
a lingua franca?” Suvremena lingvistika 71, 105-130.
STANOJEVIĆ, Mateusz-Milan/Višnja KABALIN BORENIĆ/Višnja JOSIPOVIĆ 
SMOJVER (2012) “Combining Different Types of Datain Studying Attitudes to 
English as a Lingua Franca.” Research in Language 10(1), 29-41, doi: 10.2478/
v10015-011-0043-8.
STOPAR, Andrej (2015) “Encounters with National Stereotypes in Foreign Language 
Teaching: Adjectives Describing Americans.” ELOPE Vol. 12 (1), 105-118, doi: 
10.4312/elope.12.1.105-118.
ŠABEC, Nada (2000) “British English vs. American English in a University Setting.” 
Vestnik 34 (1/2): 75-86.
W ALKER, Robin/Ee-Ling LOW/Jane SETTER (2021) English Pronunciation for a 
Global World. Oxford University Press.
Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   382 Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   382 5. 01. 2023   07:29:35 5. 01. 2023   07:29:35

383
APPENDIX: QUESTIONNAIRE
QUESTIONNAIRE
This questionnaire seeks your opinions and attitudes to different native accents of Eng-
lish. It consists of three parts. The research is anonymous. Your answers will be kept 
confidential and used for analysis purposes only.
 
PART 1. Please fill in the below slots:
Gender: _________________________
Age:___________
Nationality:_________________________
Years of learning/studying English:
I have lived in an English speaking country _____________________ (please 
specify) for _________________________ (please specify).
One or both of my parents are native speakers of English (please circle the 
answer): 
  yes   no
If your answer is yes, please specify their native English 
variety:____________________________________
PART 2.
You will hear six audio clips. After each clip, you will fill in the below questions. For 
each clip, the questions are the same. 
On a scale from 1 to 4, circle the number which best describes your attitude: 
1: strongly disagree, 2: disagree, 3: agree, 4: strongly agree.
NOW READ THE QUESTIONS.
1. The speaker of this clip sounds:
friendly 1 2 3 4
boring 1 2 3 4
well educated 1 2 3 4
confident 1 2 3 4
serious 1 2 3 4
Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   383 Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   383 5. 01. 2023   07:29:35 5. 01. 2023   07:29:35

384
2. When I listen to this speaker, I
trust her 1 2 3 4
like her 1 2 3 4
feel irritated 1 2 3 4
am amused 1 2 3 4
feel intimidated 1 2 3 4
3. This accent is
beautiful. 1 2 3 4
posh 1 2 3 4
prestigious. 1 2 3 4
old-fashioned 1 2 3 4
funny 1 2 3 4
4. I find
the pronunciation of this speaker easy to understand. 1 2 3 4
the intonation of this speaker familiar. 1 2 3 4
the rhythm of this speaker difficult to follow. 1 2 3 4
5. The reasons for the lack of intelligibility of this speaker are:
pronunciation of vowels 1 2 3 4
pronunciation of consonants 1 2 3 4
speed of delivery 1 2 3 4
rhythm of delivery 1 2 3 4
melody/intonation of delivery 1 2 3 4
6. I recognize the speaker’s accent as (please circle the variety):
RP Scottish        New Zealand          Australian         General American      Irish
PART 3.
Range the below varieties of English: 1: topmost, 6 bottommost.
1.  My favourite varieties of English are:
RP __
General American __
Scottish English __
Irish English __
Australian English __
New Zealand English __
Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   384 Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   384 5. 01. 2023   07:29:35 5. 01. 2023   07:29:35

385
2.  I am most familiar with:
RP __
General American __
Scottish English __
Irish English __
Australian English __
New Zealand English __
3.  The most appropriate variety for teaching English to Slovene learners of 
English is:
RP __
General American __
Scottish English __
Irish English __
Australian English __
New Zealand English __
Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   385 Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   385 5. 01. 2023   07:29:35 5. 01. 2023   07:29:35

386
Abstract
ATTITUDES OF SLOVENE L2 SPEAKERS OF ENGLISH TO SIX NATIVE  
V ARIETIES OF ENGLISH
The paper presents the results of an experiment whose purpose was to study the atti-
tudes towards six L1 varieties of English by Slovene students of English. Using the ver-
bal guise test, the participants were exposed to audio clips of Received Pronunciation 
(RP), General American (GA), Scottish English (ScE), Irish English (IrE), Australian 
English (AusE) and New Zealand English (NZE). They were required to complete a 
two-part questionnaire. In part one, they were asked to rate, on four-point Likert scale, 
statements about the cognitive, affective and aesthetic traits of the speakers, as well as 
the linguistic traits which they believed contributed most to their attitudes to a particu-
lar variety. In part two, they had to rank the six tested varieties indicating their general 
order of preference, their relative familiarity with the varieties and the appropriateness 
of the varieties for teaching to Slovene learners of English.
The results of the study confirm the findings of numerous other similar studies in 
giving preference to the two best-known global standard varieties (RP and GA) over 
the other varieties. 
Keywords: varieties of English, language attitudes, verbal guise test, IDEA (Interna-
tional Dialects of English Archive)
Povzetek
ODNOS SLOVENSKIH GOVORCEV ANGLEŠČINE DO ŠESTIH MATERNIH 
V ARIANT ANGLEŠČINE
V članku predstavljamo rezultate študije, katere namen je bil preučiti odnos sloven-
skih študentov angleščine do šestih maternih variant angleščine. Udeleženci so slišali 
zvočne posnetke standardne britanske, standardne ameriške, škotske, irske, avstralske 
in novozelandske angleščine. Izpolniti so morali dvodelni vprašalnik. V prvem delu so 
morali na štiristopenjski Likertovi lestvici ovrednotiti kognitivne, afektivne in estetske 
lastnosti vsake variante. Opredeliti so se morali tudi do jezikovnih lastnosti, ki najbolj 
vplivajo na njihovo percepcijo variante. V drugem delu vprašalnika so morali preuče-
vane variante razvrstiti glede na njihovo priljubljenost, prepoznavnost in primernost za 
poučevanje angleščine slovenskih govorcev.
Rezultati študije so potrdili ugotovitve številnih drugih podobnih študij v tem, da 
tudi slovenski študentje angleščine dajejo prednost standardnima variantama (britanski 
in ameriški) pred ostalimi variantami angleščine.
Ključne besede: variante angleškega jezika, jezikovni odnosi, test verbalne preobleke, 
IDEA (International Dialects of English Archive)
Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   386 Linguistica_2022_2_FINAL.indd   386 5. 01. 2023   07:29:35 5. 01. 2023   07:29:35