This old CollegeHumor sketch highlights an interesting phenomenon: it's often stigmatised, at least in the US and England, to pronounce a loanword according to the phonetics of the language it was borrowed from. For example, anecdotally, it would be strange if I pronounced "karaoke" according to the Japanese カラオケ pronunciation in a conversation with another English speaker, as opposed to the pronunciation common in the US/UK: /ˌkæriˈoʊki/.

I think that in this case, this is because the different phonetics of the Japanese word make the "native" pronunciation jarring in the middle of a sentence. Having to modify the intonation to match Japanese pitch-accent for example, and using sounds such as the alveolar flap in ラ which aren't found in English, would probably not be what the listener was expecting to hear unless the conversation was about the Japanese language or pronunciation.

The "point" that the video makes is that doing this is considered "over-pronouncing", and is considered either funny or embarrassing in contexts of two or more native speakers of a language (such as English) where one of them "over-pronounces" a loanword from another language. Presumably again it would not be stigmatised if (e.g.) English speakers were talking to Japanese natives about "karaoke" and used the Japanese pronunciation.

The question: Is this stigmatisation a cross-cultural, cross-linguistic phenomenon? I.e. is it common in all parts of the world to stigmatise the act of deliberately pronouncing a loanword (e.g. "karaoke") according to the pronunciation of the language it was loaned from? (e.g. Japanese). Or is this much more common in the English-speaking world?

This old CollegeHumor sketch highlights an interesting phenomenon: it's often frowned upon or disapproved of, at least in the US and England, to pronounce a loanword according to the phonetics of the language it was borrowed from. For example, anecdotally in the UK, an English speaker would probably think it strange if I pronounced "karaoke" according to the Japanese カラオケ pronunciation, as opposed to the pronunciation common in the US/UK: /ˌkæriˈoʊki/.

I think that in this case, this is because the different phonetics of the Japanese word make the "native" pronunciation jarring in the middle of a sentence. Having to modify the intonation to match Japanese pitch-accent for example, and using sounds such as the alveolar flap in ラ which aren't found in English, would probably not be what the listener was expecting to hear unless the conversation was about the Japanese language or pronunciation. So using the "native" pronunciation might be frowned upon/disapproved of simply because it is unexpected in the linguistic context.

The "point" that the video makes is that doing this is considered "over-pronouncing", and is considered either funny or embarrassing in contexts of two or more native speakers of a language (such as English) where one of them "over-pronounces" a loanword from another language. Presumably again it would not be frowned upon if (e.g.) English speakers were talking to Japanese natives about "karaoke" and used the Japanese pronunciation.

So my question is this:

• Does the disapproval towards approximating foreign loanword pronunciations occur at all outside of the context of English speakers using a non-English loanword?
• If so, is it common to disapprove of foreign loanword pronunciations? Or conversely, is it common in many other parts of the world to emulate foreign loanword pronunciations to the best of the speaker's ability?