Nyelvhelyesség vagy érthetőség?

In 2017 we carried out a research in order to answer the following question: what plays the most decisive role when judging the intelligibility of language learners’ speech: linguistic accuracy, the presence of natural discourse markers, or near-native pronunciation? We tested the opinion of 100 native informants of Spanish (among them 24 teachers of Spanish language) by means of an anonymous online survey in which they had to evaluate three oral samples produced by Hungarian learners of Spanish. Each sample was characterized by a strong and a weak point of the three above mentioned aspects. Our pilot research came to the conclusion that in the opinion of native Spanish speakers, morphosyn tactic errors can be compensated for by good pronunciation and the natural use of discourse markers, provided we focus on intelligibility (to be more precise, on the perception of intelligibility). By ex amining separately the opinion of native teachers of Spanish language, our results suggest that, for them, accuracy goes hand in hand with intelligibility: our 24 native teachers of Spanish considered the morphosyntactically correct sample the most intelligible, even if it was characterized by imper fect pronunciation and contained no discourse markers. We compared this result with the opinion of 24 Hungarian teachers of Spanish. In their case, the sample with the highest level of intelligibility happened to be that with good pronunciation and a good number of discourse markers, while far from being morphosyntactically correct.