"Neutrally accented" English, as Geoffrey Cartridge describes it, seems to me to be a pie in the sky. Any definition of the term will be wholly subjective and unreliable as a means of legislating any sort of practical policy, at any scale. Simply because Cartridge was told he has "neutrally accented" English by one person doesn't mean someone else would say the same of him.
It is precisely because there's no possible way of establishing such a standard that children ought to be exposed to as many varieties of spoken English as possible, so that they may learn to remain vigilant while listening. I'd say the possibility of a student suffering for this is kept in check by an attentive teacher.
The reality is that, for quite some time to come, overcoming regional accents and grasping idioms (from flash-in-the-pan slang to oldies like "pie in the sky") will be aspects of communicating in English.
I would think that a student exposed to one kind of English exclusively, even Cartridge's "neutrally accented" strand, would have less of a handle on the language than one exposed to a variety of styles.
I'd like to add that reducing the end of English to a score on an examination is demeaning and detrimental to the language, its speakers, its teachers and its students.
Ryan Joseph Hudson
Taipei
In the US’ National Security Strategy (NSS) report released last month, US President Donald Trump offered his interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine. The “Trump Corollary,” presented on page 15, is a distinctly aggressive rebranding of the more than 200-year-old foreign policy position. Beyond reasserting the sovereignty of the western hemisphere against foreign intervention, the document centers on energy and strategic assets, and attempts to redraw the map of the geopolitical landscape more broadly. It is clear that Trump no longer sees the western hemisphere as a peaceful backyard, but rather as the frontier of a new Cold War. In particular,
When it became clear that the world was entering a new era with a radical change in the US’ global stance in US President Donald Trump’s second term, many in Taiwan were concerned about what this meant for the nation’s defense against China. Instability and disruption are dangerous. Chaos introduces unknowns. There was a sense that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) might have a point with its tendency not to trust the US. The world order is certainly changing, but concerns about the implications for Taiwan of this disruption left many blind to how the same forces might also weaken
As the new year dawns, Taiwan faces a range of external uncertainties that could impact the safety and prosperity of its people and reverberate in its politics. Here are a few key questions that could spill over into Taiwan in the year ahead. WILL THE AI BUBBLE POP? The global AI boom supported Taiwan’s significant economic expansion in 2025. Taiwan’s economy grew over 7 percent and set records for exports, imports, and trade surplus. There is a brewing debate among investors about whether the AI boom will carry forward into 2026. Skeptics warn that AI-led global equity markets are overvalued and overleveraged
Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi on Monday announced that she would dissolve parliament on Friday. Although the snap election on Feb. 8 might appear to be a domestic affair, it would have real implications for Taiwan and regional security. Whether the Takaichi-led coalition can advance a stronger security policy lies in not just gaining enough seats in parliament to pass legislation, but also in a public mandate to push forward reforms to upgrade the Japanese military. As one of Taiwan’s closest neighbors, a boost in Japan’s defense capabilities would serve as a strong deterrent to China in acting unilaterally in the
RSS