# data[].attributes.body
In Vietnam, schools opt to choose one variety of Standard English and teach it only to their students. The Standard English chosen most of the times is the Received Pronunciation.

Doing this has some clear advantages, namely easier teaching and grading exams. with only one version of English, students are given a basic understanding of English, allowing them ample communication skills for their future prospect. Besides, by using a Standard English model, teachers have more ease in grading tests and exams, having not to deal with slangs, confusing dialects or uncommon vocabulary and grammar. Additionally, Standard English is one of the most commonly used English in the world, or at least it has the most commonalities with every other Standard Englishes and dialects.

On the contrary, introducing students to only one version of English may discourage them from expressing themselves fully with the new language, dampening their potential improvement. It can give them the false conception that there's only one kind of English and make them less prepared for the real world communication. Furthermore, as the some variety of Standard English, such as Received Pronunciation, begins to have less people speaking them, teaching students this variety can have negative effects on how fellow speakers view them.

# data[].attributes.body
Gwee Li Sui stated, "The future will actually sound a lot like Singlish rather than English." Gwee Li Sui compared Singlish’s progression and changes similarly to English’s evolution for 1500 years, which to him, meant that Singlish is the new model language for a globalised world where everyone is interconnected. He believed that by incorporating other languages and continuously expanding its vocabulary and syntaxes, Singlish allows itself to be appealing to everyone. As he put it, “a finished language is useless to outsiders”, he essentially said that in the future, multicultural languages similar to Singlish will be the ones that’ll gain the most attention instead of languages similar to English, those which are now finished and have little new changes.

In my opinion, I think that Gwee Li Sui’s claim is partially correct. Our world is becoming smaller; ideas and cultures are exchanged quicker than ever before, to the point where it would be unimaginable a few decades ago. Social media contributed greatly to this effect, where we do see languages being used, learnt and then spread and become the new trend, after which it became a part of the digital’s vocabulary.

However, I don’t believe that such an extreme case like Singlish will become the new global standard for languages. Despite the aforementioned fact, English still continues to be the predominant language of social media. While words and concepts are being exchanged, English remains mostly the same, with no changing of syntaxes. One problem that I think Gwee Li Sui missed is that although Singlish has great influence on languages that it comes into contact with, its constant changes are problematic to people outside it to essentially get a grasp on the language. For example, a Spanish native speaker whose language is not and likely will never be influenced by Singlish will have a hard time trying to learn Singlish due to the fact that not only do the two languages have nothing in common, but Singlish’s multicultural nature means that there is simply too much to learn and understand its constant changes.

In conclusion, I understand Gwee Li Sui’s claim will become reality at some point in the future but not to the extent that he believed. Languages like Singlish will be on the main stage of international communication, however traditional languages like English and Chinese will not be overthrown.

# data[].attributes.body
Gwee Li Sui "The future will actually sound a lot like Singlish rather than English". He likens Singlish's evolution to that of English itself. He showed how both languages assimilate words from other languages such as Malay, German, or Hokkien. In my view, Li Sui meant that as English spreads to all corners of the world, people will mix their native language with English, creating a hybrid language with its unique vocabulary and grammar, an example of which is English. To me, Gwee Li Sui has made aGwee Li Sui "The future will actually sound a lot like Singlish rather than English". He likens Singlish's evolution to that of English itself. He showed how both languages assimilate words from other languages such as Malay, German, or Hokkien. In my view, Li Sui meant that as English spreads to all corners of the world, people will mix their native language with English, creating a hybrid language with its unique vocabulary and grammar, an example of which is English. To me, Gwee Li Sui has made a pretty accurate claim. English has become the lingua franca of the globe. However, some of its grammar rules can confuse non-native speakers, and may not have the vocabulary needed to express everything in their native language. It prompts people to assimilate English into their native tongue, creating a "pidgin", or mixed languages. As time passes, these mixed languages will eventually become the native tongue of future generations. This evolution reflects the current landscape where regional dialects and languages assert their presence alongside English. All in all, Gwee Li Sui's claim underscores the current state of English and its assimilation into multiple cultures.

# data[].attributes.body
When Gwee Li Sui stated that "The future will actually sound a lot like Singlish than English", he likens the evolution of Singlish to that of English itself. Singlish, as a combination of English and other native languages such as Hokkien, Malay, Mandarin and Tamil, will become the paradigm of how global languages work, just as how English itself is a mix of many European languages (e.g French, German, Latin) as well as other languages. In my opinion, this is a flawed statement. Indeed, society is increasingly globalized, cultures intermingle with each other, enriching their respective cultures. "Tsunami" and "Graffiti", for instance can not be expressed in any other vocabulary in the English, so it is adopted to language itself, creating a more diverse and inclusive forum for all cultures alike as the lingua franca of the globe. However, it is also the identities and cultural patterns of the languages themselves that create structural constraints for the language. Singlish, for example, is still a product from the creolization of English. It is still formulated on Anglo-European cultural patterns. This structure can easily confuse non-English speakers during the learning process, not to mention that local dialects like leh, lah, lor might exclude standard speakers and other languages not included in Singlish such as Spanish or French. In conclusion, while languages are constantly changing or as Gwee himself said "a finished language is useless to outsiders", yet the unique identities found in different cultures meant that traditional languages will likely persist in the future and other languages might have to be adopted to its specificity.

# data[].attributes.body
English has long been the predominant language in the lives of people, but eventually, even the most established languages will succumb to the effects of change, it's just a matter of when and how. Gwee Li Sui’s quote; “The future will actually sound a lot like Singlish rather than English." support this sentiment. He explains that all languages go through a process of evolution, wherein words and syntax from other cultures are integrated into itself. And he claims that Singlish is just another branch of evolution of English, one that is derived from the multicultural and multilingual environment that is Singapore. Though it emerged from the informal communication between different ethnic groups, it is an evolution nonetheless. Gwee argues that in the near future, instead of everybody adhering strictly to the rules of English, the language itself will adapt to suit the people that speak it. And this is by no means exclusive to just Singlish; English has already begun to undergo numerous changes. With social media now providing a vast melting pot filled with people of all different upbringings and backgrounds, English will soon welcome a myriad of changes. Informal use of English, such as internet slang, abbreviations, and regional expressions, will increasingly become part of the language in its future versions. Some may think of it as inferior or devolving, but it is without a doubt that linguistic evolution is a natural and inevitable process.

# data[].attributes.body
It is a known fact that languages have the ability to change over time. This is because of human advancements and, especially, the shift towards globalization, leading to the creation of means of communication never seen before. In fact, this is how any language can still exist today, it adapts, it absorbs properties of other languages such as grammar, vocabulary, mixes it with it's own and allows for more and more people to use it. This is very clearly demonstrated when, for instance, English is taken into account: The language is very much unrecognizable just several centuries ago. Yet with it's rapid ability to change and adapt, taking traits from German, Latin, French and numerous other languages, it is now a very famous and successful global language. Likewise, Singlish is a language that originated from the pure intention of Singaporeans to communicate with other people without fully sufficient knowledge of English. It is due to this that Singlish is also constantly changing, adopting phenomena from many different languages and making them it's own, especially in terms of vocabulary. Therefore, Singlish really helps in the globalization effort with those who know it due to it's extensive ability to help communication-it just keeps on expanding! Hence, considering the fact that languages are constantly changing, in the future, they might very well be different, maybe even completely incomprehensible to us right now. This can be seen stated through Gwee Li Sui's statement:" The future will actually sound a lot like Singlish rather than English" where the constant evolution and refreshing nature of Singlish contrasting with the essence of the traditional sense of English we know today may well be in line with how a future language would look like: Refreshed, evolving and expanding. With such points stated, I believe that Gwee Li Sui's statement is accurate and therefore not just a claim.

# data[].attributes.body
From what Gwee Li Sui stated, I suppose that what he wanted to say was current English may evolve to become similar-sounding to Singlish. Personally, I disagree with his prediction, as I couldn't find any changes in English that would lead to this outcome. All three kinds of English, American English, British English, and Singlish, still have its substaintial number of speakers speaking it, which means change won't happen so easily. Furthermore, American English is still very dominant due to the U.S enormous influence on today's world, which perhaps may even lead to the opposite outcome of the prediction. In conclusion, I can't find much evidence that point towards Singlish becoming the new English.

# data[].attributes.body
Gwee Li Sui's was bold to state that "The future will actually sound a lot like Singlish rather than English." His argument hinges upon the fact that Singlish shares similar progression to its ancestral language, that being English. Singlish, as he sees it, embraces outside influences(other languages) and tries to figure out a way to make communication. Due to that of Singlish's inherent nature, it is able to adapt to and subsume different grammars and syntaxes for that purpose of communication - similar to how English progressed to a global language through a 1500-year span. Observing English's previous success owing to constant change and subsummation of outside influences, Li Sui -I believe - is hopeful about the prospect of Singlish being able to replicate the same achievement through his statement. He also adds that Singlish is ever-changing in itself: it's still malleable - able to change with a view to serving a more global scope of communication. What that means is that - to Gwee Li Sui - Singlish is all set to become a global language, it's just a matter of time. I reckon that is what he meant through his bold assertion.

In my view however, Li Sui is overstating Singlish's potential. Singlish, after all, is just a small branch of a whole that is English. Moreover, all of the attributes that he mentioned of Singlish aren't exclusive to the language: so if we're saying that Singlish can become a global language through the aforementioned traits, other languages can too. Also, it stands to reason that lots of language that had shared similar progression to English (as in constant adaptation) didn't become as globalized as it so similar evolution does not necessarily effect similar success. :)

All in all, I think I didn't quite get what he was talking about and was trying to rabble-rouse :)

# data[].attributes.body
To come to the claim that “The future will actually sound a lot like Singlish rather than English”, Gwee Li Sui looked into the evolution of English through 1500 years. It began as Old English and developed by absorbing grammar, syntaxes, and especially vocabulary from many other languages, thus becoming the English we know today. He believes that languages will continue to evolve in such way and this development is very much similar to the characteristics of Singlish itself, therefore making Singlish the language of the future. I agree with this claim. It is true that such changes are happening and will continue to do so in the future. English itself is constantly changing, with new words, phrases and expressions from other cultures and languages being used in everyday life. Also, since English had evolved by absorbing properties of other languages and become a global one, it is not impossible for Singlish to do the same. However, the claim may also imply that Singlish will not necessarily become a global language in particular, instead, more and more languages all over the world will have characteristics similar to that of Singlish. This is likely because nowadays when there is a lot of contact and exchange between cultures, languages may absorb features from the others and become more like the multicultural language that Singlish is, rather than each culture speaking its own distinctive language.

# data[].attributes.body
Gwee Li Sui claimed that the future will sound a lot like Singlish rather than English in his Ted talk. He compared the developing progression and similarities of the two languages, mentioning that English and Singlish both continuously change and expand their vocabularies over time as the society in which these languages are conceived are multicultural. Gwee argues that the current globalization, along with Singlish’s unique ability of “potong jalan” - a way to link its grammar and syntax to another language’s - makes Singlish more advanced and appealing to a broad range of users. A claim that I think is accurate to some extent. Despite English being the lingua franca for a long time, its grammatical, punctuation, and syntax rules often confuse learners because of how unsystematic it is. This limitation has prevented the spread of English literacy to many parts of the world, and in communities that do adopt it, people often mix English with their own native tongue and form hybrid languages such as Singlish (you guessed it). Singlish, on the other hand, allows itself to be accessible to a wide range of peoples by its constantly expanding vocabulary and the ability to create interlinking grammatical and syntax rules, which opens the door to many minorities to learn and use the language. However, some challenges must be overcome in order to make a transition from English to Singlish. As most of mankind’s knowledge, including the most important political charters to invaluable scientific researches, are written in English, a translation must be required for society to make the big leap while still functioning normally, though I believe that given enough time, these hurdles are surmountable. In conclusion, I agree with Gwee Li Sui’s prediction on Singlish superiority and will wait to see the day us English majors get replaced.

# data[].attributes.body
“Singlish is a language” is a very interesting video. It gives us an overview of Singlish’s history, its symbol, and predictions about its future with a very interesting narration. To say the least, I can somewhat agree with Gwee Li Sui’s point: ."The future will actually sound a lot like Singlish rather than English.". If I am correct, Sui's idea is that the new global language will be a collection of different languages in order to break the language barrier and conveniences. I can agree with him on this because English, one of the world's dominant languages, also borrows a lot of words from different dialects and we could say so for other languages. However, we will still have to consider that the wealth of the world still remains unbalanced and thus poorer countries won’t have a significant impact on this new language. As a result, I am afraid that this won’t materialize with the current situation.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
"The future will actually sound a lot like Singlish rather than English"

# data[].attributes.body
To me, Gwee Li Sui’s remark “The future will actually sound a lot more like Singlish rather than English” emphasises his hope on the growth of Singlish, and to a larger extent, Singapore on an international scale. As Singapore is slowly cementing itself as an uprising economic giant of Asia, its language and dialect will only ever continue to expand in popularity. Looking into the future and seeing the recent growth of Asian economic centers, it is not a far-fetched idea for those colloquial versions of English to appear more frequently and commonly around the world, however, to me, the world where English and Singlish - or Asian English dialects in general truly hold equal importance and influence will not yet to be true for years to come. Nonetheless, seeing how Singlish is rapidly developing thanks to the multicultural nature of Singapore, integrating the language of many different communities into a common dialect just like how English originally came to be, it might be plausible that Singlish could develop into a separate language in the future, near or far.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
[R] Singlish in the eyes of an insipid being

# data[].attributes.body
In his Tedx speech, Gwee Li Sui voiced his opinion: “The future will actually sound a lot like Singlish rather than English”. People cannot ascertain what is to come, but it is highly likely that the ever-evolving nature of English is the reason for such a statement. English has been evolving for more than 1500 years, starting from Old English to Middle English, and to Modern English people are using today. Since its beginning, English has been gradually shaped by influences from historical periods, wars, and cultures, and it is the fastest-growing language in the world. English inherited concepts and grammatical structures of the Germanic people and built most of its lexical resources using Greek and Latin roots. In the present, English is still developing, which can be evidently seen in the way teenagers communicate with each other. Young people nowadays have more of a tendency to adopt new concepts and expressions from different cultures and create new words and phrases to apply in their daily conversations. As time progresses, this trend could still be relevant for time to come, making English a melting pot of cultures just like Singlish. Therefore, I am strongly in accord with Mr. Gwee’s view on the future of English.

# data[].attributes.body
In the video, Gwee Li Sui stated, "The future will actually sound a lot like Singlish rather than English." What do you think he means by this statement, and what are your thoughts on his claim?

I think he intends that Singlish embodies traits of the future better than English, more than that it will ultimately become the more dominant language. It’s a reasonable claim in my opinion. The present is constantly changing, and so the future has a certain element of unpredictability and spontaneity. So for a language to be the same it must be reactive to current changes, which English can’t because of its long standing history and now its universality also (it’s already headed in the natural direction a language should and has become “optimal”, plus the large user base would make making significant changes difficult to follow through with). Meanwhile, Singlish is 50 or so years old, being more malleable and open to changes, so we can expect it to resemble whatever “current events” look like in 2124 more. It also happens to be a mishmash of wildly-different cultures of the present. English has homogenized, in a way, the languages that contributes to its creation, and now reflects an independent part of the world. But Singlish accepts both Western and Eastern influence without conforming them, presenting not unity but a kind of cooperation between languages. It preserves diversity, which feels more like an emphasis now that cultures are merging and almost encroaching on and dissolving each other.

# data[].attributes.body
In his speech about Singlish, Gwee Li Sui states his argument for the future of Singlish, with hopes of this diverse language becoming the next new hub of how people communicate. With his argument of “The future will actually sound a lot like Singlish rather than English”, this has given some thoughts about language as a whole. In my opinion, I agree with him and I believe that this statement will become the new face of Singapore. When Gwee Li Sui mentions “the future”, I believe that he is stressing the possible use of Singlish in the next generation of speakers, as more and more people come in and out of Singapore, the melting pot will soon see more cultures mixing together, and this is when Singlish will become also become the clearest showcase of unity within Singapore. It also creates a fairground for the children of the Hokkien, Malay, Mandarin and Chinese, where everyone can look past simple language barriers and contribute to an excellent and developing Singapore. And it has since proven its impact on Singapore as a whole, from a small mixture of languages, used only in small communities, it has now expanded to huge proportions, spreading across Singapore. And although taking its roots from English, I believe that with its development as of today, it will soon replace English to become the new national language of Singapore. I would like to end this with a quote from Gwee Li Sui himself: “With Singlish, if you dare to put your heart on it, we can help make ourselves into the hub of how the future speaks.”

# data[].attributes.body
In the video, Gwee Li Sui posits that the future of communication will resemble Singlish rather than English, reflecting a growing cultural identity and pride among Singaporeans, who may find Singlish relatable to them in terms of everyday conversation. As a unique blend of English, Tamil, Malay, and Chinese dialects, Singlish is evolving out of standard English, symbolizing the unity within the nation. This language will provide them with opportunities to integrate into the English-speaking world and to assert their excellence and economic development. Additionally, Gwee Li Sui's statement also highlights the global embrace of localized dialects and hybrid languages. More non-native speakers like the Indian, the Vietnamese, and the Chinese are working and living in English-speaking countries, and we have no other option but to accept the differences in their accents and word usage. By prioritizing cultural variations, we will foster a deep understanding between people from different backgrounds and cultivate the potential for internal cooperation. Overdependence on Singlish might, I suppose, affect Singaporeans' proficiency in English, so they should maintain a balance between these two languages. Considering the aforementioned, I think many countries, especially ours, should direct their strategies of teaching English towards those of Singapore.

After all, we ought to acknowledge that Singapore has overcome the language barrier and the struggle with obsolescence that most Asian countries are facing.

# data[].attributes.body
In Vietnam, Received Pronunciation (RP) is often chosen as the standard English for formal education. This essay is what my thoughts are on this approach to this approach of language.

To begin with, this standardization of the English language has many advantages. First of which is the convenience it brings when it comes to publishing and finding materials. When choosing RP as the default English pronunciation, educators can easily find the sources needed for Vietnamese learners. For example, when it comes to choosing English books for their students, schools often pick those made by prestigious British universities such as Cambridge or Oxford or use BBC Learning English as listening materials. Along with this convenience is the ability to achieve uniformity among Vietnamese learners. Having RP as the main pronunciation helps them easily navigate through the different varieties of the English and helps the entire education program as a whole run smoothly. While the benefits from this approach are undeniable, there also exists certain drawbacks. Firstly, the use of a single pronunciation will limit the potential for other types of English, which is more useful for future communications such as American or Australian English. Learners may have some difficulties in conveying their ideas to other English speakers like those in Hong Kong or Singapore. Secondly, as English becomes increasingly globalized, there will be lesser demand for standard pronunciations such as RP, thus making it harder for Vietnamese learners to use the English knowledge they use effectively.

# data[].attributes.body
In Vietnam, Received Pronunciation (RP) is chosen as a standard English variety for formal education. An advantage of this is that since Standard English is very commonly used, students who use this variety will be more easily understood by people worldwide. This approach to language teaching can also be beneficial in terms of finding resources. Most reliable books and materials are usually written in Standard English or RP, such as those published by prestigious universities like Cambridge or Oxford, therefore making it easier for students to find materials for their education. However, there are certain drawbacks to this approach. Firstly, the teaching of a single, standard variety of English may lead to discrimination between standard and non-standard English varieties due to the perception that RP is “the one true” form of English and has a higher status. Secondly, being taught only Standard English can limit students’ contact to other varieties. This may cause them difficulties in real world communication when they encounter different dialects, accents or slangs…

# data[].attributes.body
In Vietnamese schools, teachers usually teach just one standard variety of English, typically Received Pronunciation. An advantage of this approach is that it's easy for both pupils and teachers to find resources for this dialect. Almost all textbooks and materials are written in RP, such as Cambridge, and National Geographic textbooks. However, there is also a drawback to this. Because Vietnamese students are only exposed to one variety of English, they may not be familiar with other dialects and can feel confused when talking with natives, who use their dialects instead of RP. Still, it is up to the teachers to choose whether or not they want to introduce other accents to their students.

# data[].attributes.body
The Vietnamese government is currently under the decision of choosing one single standard English variety for formal education. There are both benefits and drawbacks to doing so.

Regarding the benefits, it is undeniably more convenient to teach students using one standard English variety. Specifically, students only have to learn one variety, which reduces their workload, and teachers have a much easier time teaching thanks to the lack of complexity.

However, there is one major problem with this method, which is obviously the lack of variety. Vietnamese students may not be well-equipped for studying abroad as there are so many different Englishes used around the world.

# data[].attributes.body
Formal English education in Vietnam uses one variety of English, mainly Received Pronunciation. This regulation certainly brings about both benefits and drawbacks. In this writing, I will be going more in-depth about the pros and cons.

Let us first bring up some advantages. Having a constant and standardized system of English helps with simpler communication, since everyone uses the same words and speaks the same way. This may minimize confusion, which usually occurs when different dialects and accents clash with each other. Another huge benefit is that the set of grammar and vocabulary is nearly constant*, which means that it is easier to master all the words and tenses. As such, having one single variety of English aids in the progression of learners. In my opinion, if one is not looking to go to lands where English is tremendously different (from what they have learned), then it is sufficient to study and train their English skills on the one English variety taught in Vietnamese schools.

*nearly constant: languages are always evolving, so it is inevitable that one’s English variety includes newer and more modern words, all the while deleting rather obsolete ones. Personally, I do not think these changes are huge in terms of proportion. It is not like one has to relearn English from the ground up.

What about disadvantages ? As I mentioned, there are countries that use some form of English that the average Vietnamese would find hard to comprehend, since only one variety of English is taught in this nation. In fact, these special Englishes are in every corner of the world. To name a few, we have: ‘Singlish’ – the one dialect prevalent in Singapore, ‘Australian English’ – really unique accent and vocabulary, and many more. If English education in Vietnam only makes use of one dialect, then the majority of the time, it is going to be challenging to converse with locals when a Vietnamese goes abroad. Statistics have shown that Singapore and Australia are among the favorite destinations of Vietnamese expatriates. This can only mean one thing: this uniform system of English teaching presents a considerable drawback for a portion of Vietnamese English learners who wish to leave Vietnam later.

Overall, I think it depends on what you plan to do with your English that determines your view on this subject. As an addition, I think schools should try to introduce different dialects of English for students to know more about the diversity and complexity of this language and provide a chance for them to get a deeper understanding of the English variety they actually want to learn.

# data[].attributes.body
There have been debates on whether teaching a single standard English variety, more specifically Received Pronunciation (RP), is optimal for language teaching in Vietnam. On one hand, focusing on a singular version of a language might offer clarity and consistency in that specific aspect, such as better pronunciation and understanding of grammar rules, which may also accelerate the rate at which students learn the language. There’s also the notion that RP is generally the most widely used variation of English, meaning that students who primarily study RP are given access to more professional opportunities. With that being said, however, arguments have been raised that tunnel visioning solely on RP might give learners a skewed idea of English itself. It might foster a cultural bias toward the side of English they’re familiar with, making them think that speakers of non-RP variations are inferior. So overall, while choosing to stick with a specific type of English certainly has its advantages, I think that a balanced approach that exposes learners to a variety of English accents and dialects while still emphasizing the importance of clear and effective communication may be more beneficial in the long run.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that teaching Received Pronounciation in the formal Vietnamese classroom can have some advantages as well as disadvantages.

For the advantages, having one united English variety means fully uniting formal English communication. The key word here is "formal", this means business and "work" English, and using one English varienty will simply mean that there will be more control for dialects and accents within the workplace. Everyone will be using the same accent, and this, will improve understanding between workers as a whole.

However, when looking at the disadvantages, fully transitioning to teaching RP in Vietnam will require great time and effort. Since Vietnam has a huge number of English speakers, it is therefore true that the amount of English speakers using different types of dialects is not small to say the least. Convincing each and every one of those English speakers to re-learn the RP dialect and use it as their "new" way of English communication will be extremely time consuming and difficult.

In my opinion, non-native speakers of the English language should be able to speak the accent and the dialect they desire, and espescially in Vietnam, it will not be a wise idea to fully convert all English into RP English

# data[].attributes.body
Educational institutions in Vietnam are opting for a single variety of Standard English, typically RP. It's clear that this approach has its upsides as well as downsides. One clear upside of the approach is that a single variety of Standard English makes for easier communication and understanding among pupils and teachers. It goes without saying that each type of Standard English is a unique dialect with different vocab, pronunciation and grammar. Due to the variations from dialect to dialect, teaching a variety of Standard English may lead to users of different dialects having trouble understanding each other. Having a single Standard English kind solves that issue as it means that pupils and teachers will share the same dialect, preventing any risk of miscommunication/ misunderstanding that arises from different dialects being used. Notwithstanding the aforementioned merit, there exist a fatal flaw to this approach. Being taught a single kind of Standard English only accustoms pupils to a single dialect, and it does not equip them for the endless varieties of English out there in the world. As a result, pupils who were taught in the mentioned approach may be left confused or simply stumped when communicating with users of different dialects in the real world. All in all, while Vietnamese schools choosing a single kind of Standard English for formal education allows for easier communication between pupils and teachers, it may not fully prepare the pupils for the real world where exists disparate variations of English too.

# data[].attributes.body
There aren’t many drawbacks because Vietnam isn’t an English speaking country and doesn’t have a “native” dialect to preserve, and accents are more our mother tongue’s influence on our approach to other languages than any significant part of culture. Additionally, English is already very complicated, being an amalgamation of many different languages, so further complicating it by introducing the many varieties is counterproductive. Learning only the accepted variant (even if this variant is not too widely used) that other countries know of and learn theoretically, means that we have the best chance of understanding other on a global level while still learning more effectively.

On the other hand, this “standard” limits our vision for what English could be, and its reputation in modern media is getting worse and worse, and due to globalization, it may not take center stage for much longer. “Standard” English is very formal, and adhering to it 100% might stop us from developing and popularizing a new variant that contains our culture, a Vietlish if you will, that helps us enter the international stage as a more prominent player. Times have also changed, and we need to be more flexible to live with them; if tomorrow, “standard” English is declared to no longer be UK RP, we would be able to adapt to the new variant more easily if we already know some other varieties.

# data[].attributes.body
The education of English in Vietnam, especially in the formal system, focuses mainly on Received Pronunciation. This way of regulation in the system certainly offers both benefits and drawbacks to learners of the language. The benefit is obviously the fact that the students will still be able to benefit from their proficiency of English, being able to search for documents, have conversations, learn more knowledge using the language, while being relatively easy to learn compared to other languages. The simplicity and universalness of the language would also help the teacher themselves, being able to teach, and make and grade exams to many students without having to shape themselves to the "slangs" and such of each and every students. The drawback of this system may be the fact that it interferes with the student mind, giving them a bias about what they already know and that the language they learn is "prestigious" and that they can not modify it, integrate their culture into it.

# data[].attributes.body
Personally, the nativeness of English teachers that I have encountered have no effect on how I study. In fact, some NNESTs perform even better than the NESTs. Therefore, I believe how native English teachers are shouldn't be considered as an important factor in hiring teachers. Teachers should be judged based on how well they can teach, not based on their mother tongue.

# data[].attributes.body
To me, nativeness had little effect on my learning experience. And so, I don't think it had a huge impact in language education. I believe this because native teachers have learned it since birth, and they may not be able to relate to the process of learning the language as a second one.

# data[].attributes.body
just some obstacles to learning English

# data[].attributes.body
How did the native-ness of NESTs (Native English-Speaking Teachers) and NNESTs (Non-Native English-Speaking Teachers) impact your learning experience? Do you believe this factor is critical in language education, and why?

From my experience, the native-ness of NESTS as well as NNESTs has not had much observable impact on my learning experience. From my years of studying Tich Hop with EMG, I see that I'm generally more comfortable and relaxed to learn from NESTs. I think this is largely in part due to the native-ness that shaped their nature: they often are very open & amicable. Even old NESTs were no exception as well. However, the same can't probably be said about NNESTs . While there are some NNESTs that Vietnamese students feel comfortable to learn from/ be with, some others just straight-up put students off (usually owing to their rigidity or strictness). I reckon this somehow stems from the native-ness of Vietnamese where absolute discipline is upheld. Other than that, I don't see much alterations in my learning experience from the "native-ness" of either kinds of teachers.

I don't subscribe to the idea that the native-ness of teachers plays a critical role in language education at all. If anything, its supposed "role" is hardly noticeable. There is barely a difference between the impact of NEST's native-ness or that of NNESTs's. As the factors that matter in one's language education or in any other education contexts are perception and retention of knowledge (grammar, vocabs,etc), which barely have any connection to a teacher's native-ness (much less one is influenced by the other), I really don't see how native-ness even holds much significance in language education. :0

# data[].attributes.body
My English learning experience was not affected much by the nativeness of my teachers. All of the individuals who taught me possessed excellent fluency, pronunciation, and a deep understanding of the language structure, regardless of whether they spoke English natively or not. In my opinion, nativeness should not be seen as a top priority in language education. Even if somebody is not native, they can still master the language and teaching methods. These two things matter more than what one’s mother tongue is. In short, speaking a language natively is not enough to teach it effectively.

# data[].attributes.body
Like any other Vietnamese kid, I was heavily influenced by the 'stigmatization' of non-native English teachers. Those teachers' so-called incompetence is attributed to their non-standard accents and the prescriptive English education they received. Whereas native teachers were seen as the key to 'native-like' proficiency, non-native teachers were only deemed as a way to ace standardized tests.

But I was wrong, of course. As I got into PTNK and recently learned about 'nativespeakerism', I realized that being a native English speaker doesn't align with possessing excellent teaching abilities. All of my English teachers at PTNK are entirely Vietnamese, yet they still successfully convey meaningful lessons and empower me to learn as an English major.

Despite my previous assumptions, I believe that whether or not my instructors are native speakers doesn't affect my learning outcome eventually. What really matters is that they're always inspiring me with their methods and teaching me new things daily.

# data[].attributes.body
In my own experience as a student who first got access to English from quite a young age, I can say that Vietnamese people (or at least the people in my area) greatly prefer NESTs over NNEST. However, the impact of their nativeness to the students' learning is still greatly debatable. People often naively think that studying with NESTs will always definitely make them speak better English or learn better, this is not always the case. NESTs undoubtedly have a more natural and native accent compared to NNESTS, they also have better usage of vocabulary when in conversation. However, in other English skills, NESTs might not be needed. Take grammar, for example, a Vietnamese - English major might even do a better job at explaining and teaching grammar to a Vietnamese classroom than the average NEST. Since grammar is based on logic and culture, deciphering the English grammatical system to Vietnamese students is already a daunting task, and a NNEST can better switch between languages (just in case they need something to be explained in Vietnamese). I also think that NNESTs are just much more accessible and affordable for language learners. Just finding a NEST can already be difficult, their salary and work ethics might also be extremely different from us. I hope am NOT undermining the special benefits that NESTs might bring to the classroom, however, if it was me to choose between studying with a NEST and a NNEST, I think it is still safe to trust in today's development of NNESTs

# data[].attributes.body
I have studied with native English-speaking teachers throughout my learning experience, but that barely had any impact on my English. It was all thanks to my dad that I managed to achieve this level of proficiency in English. Despite not being a native, he knew what methods were the most suitable for me and taught me how to learn the language correctly so I could study by myself. A non-native can still be a great teacher if they have mastered the language and teaching methods. That is what I think matters the most when it comes to teaching. Therefore, I don’t think that the nativeness of NESTs should be a criticality in language education. Teachers should be hired based on their knowledge of the language and their skills as a teacher, not on whether they are a native or not.

# data[].attributes.body
In my own experience, the nativeness of NESTs and NNESTs have a fairly significant impact on my language development. Firstly, the accent of NESTs defines the English accent I am communicating right now, especially when I was at a young age. Secondly, the nativeness of NESTs also helps me understand more of the Anglo-American culture associated with the language, and it gives me better insight into English textbooks and learning documents. While it may have a large effect on my learning experience, it is not that important in language education as a whole. It is more about the way teachers can deliver the lessons that affect students the most, not necessarily their familiarity with the original culture. Another point is that the lack of NESTs in education means that NNESTs are highly considered, especially with the global demand for the language itself, therefore nativeness of educators is just a secondary factor in language education.

# data[].attributes.body
Personally speaking, I have only interacted with a native English teacher once or twice, and that time was in 8th grade. The little amount of interaction also meant that my English learning experience basically had no "live" influence from the native aspect of the language. I did watch a lot of Top Gear videos (the old ones of course, the new ones kinda suck) which did allow me to somewhat mimic the British accent, but that is about it. Non-native English speaking teachers, however, are the people who allow me to go this far on the English journey. Almost all aspects of English I have learnt have been thanks to the teaching of Vietnamese teachers. Therefore, I can say that, most of the language can be acquired and mastered without the involvement of a native speaker. However, with some other aspects in speaking such as pacing and the accent itself, a teacher who is a native of the language might be able to help a learner with this better than a non-native one. It should also be considered that the learning experience might actually vary student to student, those with a higher understanding of the knowledge may prefer native teachers for....."who knows what?" reasons.

# data[].attributes.body
The discussion on IELTS is a complex and multifaceted issue. Even though I acknowledge the strengths of IELTS as an evaluation of learners' proficiency in English, determining whether one can study the language at higher education or live abroad, this test has been overrated. IELTS is noticeably a big business now, with numerous English centers emerging and students starting to prepare for the test at a young age. In the given article, what resonates most with me is the sentence, "They are milking poor parents out of their hard-earned money". This is particularly true considering the exorbitant costs of IELTS courses compared to the low average salary of Vietnamese workers. Many blindly lay their trust in IELTS centers full of gimmicks, which offer unhelpful tips for the test and talk their students into believing that they will achieve a high score after following teachers' instructions, even if they begin from a barely competent level. These centers attract students by saying they have unique methods of teaching that help learners recognize the fundamental aspects of English when, in fact, they haven't the least idea of doing so. A high score in IELTS does not necessarily reflect one's actual English proficiency as he or she may be familiar with only this test. When it comes to another standardized exam like CAE or CPE, this student can get confused and frustrated by a wide range of skills that are not involved in the IELTS test. Therefore, I contend that IELTS merely shows one's level at a specific time and may not ensure this person's long-term achievements. Additionally, it is ironic that the American educational system views a student with a 7.0 IELTS score and another with an 8.0 as equivalent, particularly when they are applying for majors unrelated to linguistics. In such cases, specialized knowledge and other soft skills are more critical. Vietnamese educational settings often emphasize prescriptive English, which may be less useful in native English-speaking countries.

The aforementioned thoughts do not intentionally blame the IELTS test itself. Indeed, we, as learners of advanced English, still need high results in IELTS. What should be changed is the way people view the IELTS test nowadays. Rather than paying money just to prepare for the test, students should aim for long-term goals and benefits by fostering effective communication and honing other English skills outside of IELTS.

# data[].attributes.body
For the recap activity, can you share you thoughts on why so many parents and students "deify" the value of the Ielts test and what detrimental effects can be made on the language acquisition of a student.

The worship of Ielts among parents and students (as is the case with countries where English is a second language) mainly stem from its global recognition. As the exam is widely accepted around the globe, people would naturally gravitate towards it. However, this does not truly explain the irrational extent of importance people place on the Ielts exam nowadays. A more in-depth analysis will be needed.

The Ielts exam is not only seen as the norm (what is generally accepted) but it is also regarded as something "international" to countries where English is not the first language. That means a possible impetus behind the deification of Ielts would be the innate xenophilia(attraction to anything foreign) of people. Owing to its common association with the "foreign" and "international", parents and students - who are xenophilic in nature- would indubitably be captivated by the Ielts exam, so much so that they would worship it. It is also important to note that with more educational systems integrating the Ielts exam into its workings(usually being the gate to direct admission to unis, etc), parents and students are pretty much bound to be attracted to it. The Ielts in this context serves as a feasible alternative to traditional college admission methods, thus explains the reverence people have towards it.

A detrimental effect the worship of Ielts may have on language acquisition of students is the outcome-based learning that it imprints on students. When people deify the Ielts exam, they are led to believe that what matters is the numerical value that is printed on their scoresheet, not their language acquisition journey that underlies their score. This means that after having reached their desired band score, they may well lose the drive to continue learning English, and their language acquisition progress stagnates there.

# data[].attributes.body
The IELTS test is greatly valued, perhaps even exaggerated, because of the numerous benefits that it brings, such as scholarship and higher chance of employment. However, if parents and students "deify" the value of the test so much, the IELTS test will quickly lose that value due to how many students try to get it, and the job market may become even more intense. Furthermore, students might get so wrapped up with preparing for the IELTS that they would perform considerably worse in other subjects.

# data[].attributes.body
Something about IELTS

IELTS has truly become the holy grail of English learning in the eyes of many parents and students. There are several reasons for this. First, the popularization and marketing of this exam are superior to similar methods of English assessment. Walk through a random public school, and you may see a banner showcasing an IELTS course at some big center. These English centers constantly advertise the vitality and influence of IELTS on a learner’s future education, every time, everywhere. What is worse, they are not the only promoters. Students who achieve outstanding scores are praised all over social media. They are often perceived as ‘top of the English game’, which just pushes the hype and value of the test to obscene heights. The IELTS marketing scheme is no different from a bottomless, ever-expanding pyramid, where IELTS high achievers and teachers on the current floor will recruit more newcomers to join right below them. Another point that should be considered is that other English assessment tests, such as the TOEFL, TOEIC, and many more, are still somewhat obscure to the majority of the public. They are not as ubiquitous or trendy as IELTS. As such, though they serve nearly the same functions in terms of English testing, these exams are seldom considered an alternative to the glorious and well-known IELTS. Finally, most international universities and colleges use IELTS predominantly for the qualification of foreign candidates in terms of their English capability. With globalization, the number of individuals wanting to study abroad, especially in developing countries, keeps on rising at an unprecedented rate. So it is hardly surprising to see people perceiving IELTS as their only shot at getting a spot in a foreign school. There are still many more explanations, but these three have already painted a big picture of why many parents and students regard the IELTS test as some kind of be-all and end-all—the ultimate final boss of the English language.

One important question is: Will this ‘deification’ of IELTS have a detrimental effect on the learners? Personally, there may be some harmful issues, but they are not too severe. One, the test has had a consistent format throughout the years, tempting students to resort to neat tricks to bypass the difficulty. I have seen some “IELTS reading tips” from “IELTS professionals",  and one of them is along the lines of “only read the first and last sentence to find the main idea of a paragraph”. This might work “95% of the time” (at least according to these tutors), but outside the IELTS domain, it is basically useless. Abusing these techniques creates a bad habit for learners, particularly those who desire a high IELTS score but have yet to reach that proficiency level. Two, the ‘deification’ may put too much weight on the scores of learners, not the general improvement in skills. This could lead to a stressful environment that is counterproductive for someone who wants to hone their language ability. Thankfully, if one has diligence and the right mindset, these troubles can be slowly alleviated. In conclusion, there are concerning but curable effects that stem from the consecration of the IELTS test.

# data[].attributes.body
IELTS tests are arguably the most notorious tests in Viet Nam. It’s so popular to the point that you can ask any student on the street and they’ll know what IELTS is. However, this popularity has attracted the rise of English teaching centers all over the place, leeching off the popularity of IELTS in order to make a quick buck.

IELTS is a standardized English test that is widely accepted in many universities, colleges and companies around the world. Additionally to being a requirement, a higher IELTS score will give you better chances of acceptance than others. As a matter of fact, its popularity is much higher than other standardized tests such as the SAT, the TOEFL, and many more. Its accessibility is also a side effect of its popularity, as there are centers of English teaching focusing heavily, even entirely, on the IELTS test.

It’s easy to understand why parents and students “deify” and attach much importance to getting a high IELTS score. Studying abroad and getting scholarships are things that rely partially on the IELTS test being high. These are things that can greatly determine a person’s future career and any parents would want to give their children the best chances. Similarly for students, they are looking for opportunities to achieve a better resume, of which a high IELTS test score is a must. Another aspect that greatly contributes to the IELTS test’s popularity is the centers’ marketing, of which the main aim is money. Although most would say the reason for the IELTS’s deification is that English is an international language, I would hardly disagree. With the way the English teaching center is teaching students how to pass the IELTS test specifically, English is hardly the main focus here. It’s an overgeneralization for sure, but it is still based on some reality.

The shifting focus from English to the IELTS test is quite frankly scary to me. People are completely missing the point of the IELTS test. It is supposed to test the English capabilities, not to be a stepping stone for future success. I hope that this abuse of the IELTS test will be recognized in the future, as I don’t think that this is only happening in Viet Nam. I think the importance of English is much more than just a test. The generalization of English into a single test will create a community of people with extremely specialized English skills that can hardly be applied in other fields

# data[].attributes.body
In Vietnamese compulsory education, the difficulty of the English subject rarely stretches out to upper B2, which is the minimum for English users to function well in most circumstances. That means, apart from hundreds of English periods at school, students have to attend extra classes to reach the desired English proficiency of prestigious universities or lucrative jobs. Those two factors contribute to the national disproportion in English literacy.

So the 'deification' of IELTS doesn't just appear out of thin air - it stems from the fact that our educational system is lacking the means to correctly evaluate and reflect students' English proficiency. Under circumstances where recruiters or admissions offices can't trust the English grade report from high school, IELTS serves as the 'accurate' measurement of one's English level. However, this exclusivity in assessment results in parents and other stakeholders neglecting the actual process of learning English. Grinding for the IELTS test (mostly involving learning strategies for a specific set of questions) is equivalent to learning English, while learning English the 'traditional' way is considered to reap rather elusive results. The truth is, however hard the students prepare for the questions their score bands won't increase if their actual English proficiency doesn't improve.

That said, the IELTS exam still works as a temporary solution to our educational crisis: More people are given opportunities through this (highly) accessible test. It is educators', the government's, and especially our responsibility to modify the current stereotype and steer towards a better evaluative method of English proficiency.

# data[].attributes.body
Since the day that IELTS was introduced to Vietnam in the mid-90s, the test system and grading has been used and valued by many to the point of deification. It was seen as the "door" or the "key" to a higher understanding of English, and therefore, can open up "endless opportunities" in the future for anyone ( especially students) if they get a good enough IELTS grading. The reason for this, however, is pretty clear, until the 2018 programme, unless you manage to get yourself a spot in a "gifted" English class in schools, the standard knowledge and education of English barely rises above B2. Factor this with the speeding process of globalisation, the process of learning new, more technical information, the application in employment, and the communication with foreigners all now involves English. This really does mean that having a more sufficient understanding of English, which learning and scoring high in IELTS has been the most efficient and approachable method for more than 2 decades, really does open up the door to the future.

However, this is due to the fact that the education system never introduced more complex English knowledge to students. This also meant that aside from standardised tests, IELTS scores have been used to assess the students' "true ability" in English. However, with a presence of more than 3 decades, people would have obviously figured out gimmicks, tricks and tips to solve the IELTS. Unfortunately, in many "IELTS training centres", these "strategies" are what is being taught to those who decided to study there. Since, given how parents and students want to get high IELTS scores, they would usually submit themselves to these centres, in hopes of being able to "level up" their English skills and ensure better future prospects. This would mean that the true purpose of the IELTS test- English proficiency assessment- has mostly been defeated, the students ratings are almost certainly inaccurate, and their actual ability may very well be underwhelming. The deification of IELTS, therefore, although stemming out from good intentions, may result in an unwanted and, personally speaking, infuriating outcome.

# data[].attributes.body
Many parents and students "deify" the IELTS test because of its use as a standard for their future studies, a common feature in countries where English is used as a second language. In an internationalized environment where more people are open to greater opportunities abroad, especially in First World countries, tests like IELTS have become the golden standard to secure a better life. Therefore, parents and students worship the test as a means of higher education and career prospects. This logic for IELTS also coincides with the East Asian way of learning, that is through sheer determination and restless work, which makes the IELTS test equal to that of a turning point in academic and social progress. As a result, this has formed the concept of IELTS as a test like TS10 or THPTQG, which can be seen in the rise of IELTS learning centers in responding to the increasing demands from parents and students.

This conception of IELTS has created tremendous consequences for students' language acquisition in terms short-term and long-term effectiveness. A cult-like attitude towards may be brutally exploited by poor-quality English centers for massive profit, making it not only academically ineffective but also financially detrimental, especially those with struggling incomes. The IELTS test is also meant to last for a short time, which means candidates must do the test again for a renewal of certificate, which renders all hard-working efforts useless and creates a vicious circle of harsh work and certificate termination. Therefor, the deification of IELTS paradoxically hampers potential language acquisition for students by wasting time needed to acquire the necessary linguistic skills needed for English proficiency tests like IELTS.