• Author / Uploaded
• Jccd Jccd

• Categories
• Sociolingüística
• Segundo lenguaje
• Lingüística
• Comunicación
• Aquisición de idioma

Citation preview

Communicative Competence and Analysis of its Components

1. Introduction Many linguists have attempted to describe the general properties or characteristics of all languages. It does little good to discuss language outside the framework provided by communication. While language is not essential for communication, the reverse is not true. Language is a shared code that enables users to transmit ideas and desires to one another. It is shared by these language users because they wish to communicate. No one in his right mind would devise or learn such a complex system without purpose in mind. Therefore, communication is definable as a “mutual exchange between two or more individuals which enhances cooperation and establishes commonality”. Communicative competence is, of course, competence or ability to communicate. It concerns both spoken or written language and all four language skills. Some people mistakenly think of communication as occurring only through the medium of speech, in the following topic we will check that there is room for communication regarding some other mediums.

2. Communicative Competence 2.1.

The Concept of Communicative Competence The study of language acquisition has been strongly influenced by the theory

of generative grammar. Chomsky (1968) has argued that the speed with which children are able to infer the grammatical rules underlying the speech they hear about them, and then to use these rules for the construction of utterances they have never heard before, suggests that children born with a knowledge of the formal principles which determine the grammatical structure of the language. This is the “rationalist” hypothesis. It has been criticised by Campbell and Wales (1970) who argue that Chomsky and many of the psychologists who have influenced him have failed to give sufficient attention to the environmental factors involved in the

development of what they call communicative competence. They bestow the greatest importance to the speaker´s “communicative” ability (which seems to correspond quite closely with Halliday´s textual function). According to Halliday, the textual function of language has to provide links with itself and with features of the situation in which it is used. This is what enables the speaker or writer to construct “text”, or connected passages of discourse that is situationally relevant; and enables the listener or the reader to distinguish a text from a random set of sentences. So the utterances of a text will only fit certain situations that define the appropriate language use. The ability to use one’s language in a variety of socially determined situations is as much as central a part of linguistics “competence” as the ability to produce grammatically well-formed sentences. 2.2.

The First Language Acquisition of Communicative Competence We now turn to the problem of explaining the acquisition of communicative

competence. Campbell and Wales believe that much more attention must be paid to the linguistic environment of the developing child than has been given in the recent past. Among the questions that might be investigated are the following: a) Is there a tendency among parents to simplify their speech when addressing children? And, if so, what form does this simplification take? b) How do parents react to non-comprehension or mis-comprehension and how do they modify their subsequent questions or constructions? c) What sources of information are available to the developing child about the well-formedness and appropriateness of his utterances or about the accuracy of his comprehension? d) How often do this or that constructions occur in the speech of parents? e) In what contexts are these constructions used? f) To what extent do parents correct, repeat, expand or elaborate the speech of children and what form does this intervention take?

A linguist such as Brown has shown a clear awareness of the importance of describing the communicative environment. He has shown, for example, that, for the families on which he has data, “approval and disapproval” are primarily linked to the truth value of the proposition which the adult fits to the child´s generally incomplete and often deformed sentence. Explicit approval or disapproval of either syntax or morphology is extremely rare in our record and so seems not to be the force propelling the child from immature to mature forms. 2.3.

From Communicative Competence to Second / Foreign language Pedagogy This general interest in language for communication is viewed as a

promising departure from the narrower and still popular focus on language as grammar. Communication is understood by Canale (1983) as the exchange and negotiation of information between at least two individuals through the use of verbal and non-verbal symbols. Information is assumed to consist of conceptual, socio-cultural, affective and other content. In this sense communication involves the continuous evaluation and negotiation of meaning on the part of the participants. In Canale and Swain (1980) communicative competence was understood as the underlying systems of knowledge and skill required for communication. Actual communication is the realization of such knowledge and skill under limiting psychological and environmental conditions such as memory and perceptual constraints, fatigue, nervousness, distractions and interfering background noises. The term “actual communication” is preferred by Canale (1983) since the earlier term “performance”. The view in Canale and Swain is that communicative competence is an essential part of actual communication but is reflected only, and sometimes imperfectly (for example in random and inadvertent slips of the tongue, mixing of registers) due to general limiting conditions.

They stress that communicative competence refers to both knowledge and skill. The former refers here to what one knows (consciously and unconsciously) about the language and about other aspects of communicative language use; the latter refers to how well one can perform this knowledge in actual communication, that is, in actual situations.

3. Analysis of the Components of Communicative Competence The framework of study for communicative competence proposed four areas of knowledge and skill: grammatical competence, sociolinguistic competence, discourse competence and strategic competence. 3.1. Grammatical Competence This type of competence remains concerned with mastery of the language code (verbal or non-verbal) itself. Thus included here are features and rules of the language such as vocabulary, word formation, sentence formation, pronunciation, spelling and linguistic semantics. It should be noted that it is still not clear that any current theory of grammar can be selected over others to characterize this competence or in what ways a theory of grammar is directly relevant for second language pedagogy. Therefore we can think of grammar as being a central part of language which related sound and meaning. The meaning of message conveyed by language has to be converted into words put together according to grammatical rules, and these words are then conveyed by sound. So meanings are conveyed, via grammar, in sound. Semantics   Grammar Phonology But what about writing? One of the ideas which many people have about grammar is that it has to do with the written language. But the written form of a language is really only secondary to its spoken form, which developed first. We learn to speak before we learn to write; and whereas we learn to speak our first language naturally, without tuition, from the language we hear about us, we have to be taught to write: that is, to convert our speech into a written or secondary

form. However, writing performs an extremely important function in our culture, and so we shall view grammar as a mechanism for producing both speech and writing. Semantics  Grammar  Phonology or writing systems 3.2. Sociolinguistic Competence Sociolinguistic competence addresses the extent to which utterances are produced and understood appropriately in different sociolinguistic contexts depending on contextual factors such as status of participants, purposes of the interaction, and norms or conventions of interaction. Appropriateness of utterances refers to both appropriateness of meaning and appropriateness of form. Appropriateness of meaning concerns the extent to which particular communicative situations, attitudes and ideas are judged to be proper in a given situation. Appropriateness of form concerns the extent to which a given meaning is represented in a verbal and/or non-verbal form that is proper in a given sociolinguistic context. There is a tendency in many second language programmes to treat sociolinguistic competence as less important than grammatical competence. This tendency ignores the fact that sociolinguistic competence is crucial in interpreting utterances for their social meaning when it is not clear from the literal meaning of utterances or from non-verbal cues. Blum-Kulka (1980) distinguishes three types of rules that interact in determining how effectively a given communication function is conveyed and interpreted. Pragmatic rules refer to the situational preconditions that must be satisfied to carry out a given communication function (i.e. to give a command, one must have the right to do so). Social-appropriateness rules deal with whether or not a given function would normally be conveyed at all and, if so, with how much directness (i.e. asking a stranger how much he earns). Linguistic-realization rules involve a number of considerations, such as the frequency with which a given grammatical form is used to convey a given function, the number and structural

range of forms associated with each function, the generality of forms across functions and situations, and the means of modulating the attitudinal tone of a given function. 3.3. Discourse Competence This type of competence concerns mastery of how to combine grammatical forms and meanings to achieve a unified spoken or written text in different genres. By genre is meant the type of text (Oral and written narrative, argumentative essay, descriptive text…). Unity of a text is achieved through cohesion in form and coherence in meaning. Cohesion deals with how utterances are linked structurally and facilitates interpretation of a text. There are a wide range of cohesion devices such as pronouns, synonyms, ellipsis, conjunctions etc. Coherence refers to the relationships among the different meanings in a text. For example, let´s pay attention to the following conversation, taken from the work of Widdowson (1978): Speaker A: That´s the telephone Speaker B: I´m in the bath Speaker A: OK Although there is no overt signal of cohesion among these utterances, Widdowson points out that they do form coherent discourse to the extent that A´s first utterance functions as a request, that B´s reply function as an excuse for not complying with A´s request, and that A´s final remark is an acceptance of B´s excuse. It is reasonably clear that this notion of discourse knowledge and skill can be distinguished from grammatical competence and sociolinguistic competence. For example: Speaker A: What did the rain do? Speaker B: The crops were destroyed by the rain B´s reply is grammatical and sociolinguistically appropriate within our framework but does not tie in well with A´s question. So we will come across texts

that can be regarded as correct under a grammatical and sociolinguistic point of view but that do not work properly regarding the discourse competence. This interaction of grammatical, sociolinguistic and discourse rules is suggestive of the complexity of communicative competence and is consistent with the distinction that is proposed here among these three areas of competence. 3.4. Strategic Competence This component is composed of mastery of verbal and non-verbal communication strategies that may be called into action for two main reasons: 1) To compensate for breakdowns in communication due to limiting conditions in actual communication (i.e. momentary inability to recall an idea) or to insufficient competence in one or more areas of the communicative competence. One of the main devices used when occurring such conditions is Paraphrase. 2) To enhance the effectiveness of communication (i.e. deliberately slow and soft speech for rhetorical effect) Communication strategies are crucial at the beginning stages of second language learning. Learners must be encouraged to use such strategies (rather than remain silent if they cannot produce grammatically accurate forms, for example). One of the earliest typologies that assembled communication strategies in an organized fashion was that of Tarone (1977). 1) Avoidance: 1.1)

Topic avoidance: the speaker may avoid introducing certain topics because of lack of sufficient vocabulary to discuss them.

1.2)

Message abandonment: a speaker that does not possess sufficient vocabulary or confidence to discuss that topic in the target language may change the topic.

2) Paraphrase: 2.1)

Approximation: lacking a word in the target language, the speaker may choose an approximate word, such as a synonym (shop instead of department store)

2.2)

Word coinage: A word may be made up in an attempt to fill out a gap in knowledge of a target language item. For example in the following utterance the speaker lacked the word ice breaker: Helsinki produces a lot of ice crushing ships.

2.3)

Circumlotion: A paraphrase or description of a word may be used when a word is unknown. For example: a place for books, instead of a bookshelf.

3) Conscious transfer / borrowing: 3.1)

Literal translation: The Spanish President of the Government, instead of The Spanish Prime Minister.

3.2)

Language switch: A word from the mother tongue may be used when the target language word cannot be remembered: A- I felt very…”cortado” you know? B- You felt very shy? A- Yes, shy!

4) Appeal for assistance: When a second-language user signals a need for repair, the conversational partner is often forced to use a simple word or structure, or to shift the topic to the beginning of the sentence where it may be easier to identify: A- Did you enjoy the ballet? B- Huh? A- The ballet…the dancing, on Friday night. Did you enjoy it? 5) Mime: The speaker may act out a word: A- Then the plane… (mimes a plane taking off) B- Is took off?

A- That´s it!

4. Conclusion It is somewhat surprising that second language pedagogy has put skilloriented activities into practice only infrequently and sporadically. Concerns of a practical nature are certainly important; but it is an exercise in futility and frustration to employ essentially knowledge-oriented techniques that are insufficient for attaining programme goals concerned with actual language use. Consider such a state of affairs in other domains: for example, a driver training programme. Suppose that such a driving programme focused on knowledge of traffic laws, recognition of road signs, and how to operate an automobile-perhaps including simulated or actual driving on a specifically designed and controlled course-but provided not opportunity to drive in actual traffic. Suppose further that for the students in such a programme this was their only exposure to driving, i.e. that they were otherwise unfamiliar with automobiles and traffic. How well would graduates of this programme fare in the real situation? To what extent would they have gained sufficient confidence even to try to make use of training when placed in actual traffic? It may be useful to pursue this example further to clarify the necessity and usefulness of knowledge-oriented and skill-oriented activities in second language pedagogy. Of course it might also be the case that different learners prefer and profit from different dosages of knowledge-oriented and skill-oriented teaching and testing methods. Such learner differences are no doubt important, especially as concerns motivation, and must therefore be handled by a theory of second language learning. But the argument for different dosages of knowledge-oriented and skill-oriented methods for certain learners is by no means an argument against the necessity of both methods for the majority of learners. This theoretical framework is intended to be applied to second language teaching and testing. Such a communicative approach is thus an integrative one in

which the main goal is to prepare and encourage learners to exploit in an optimal way their limited communicative competence in the second language in order to participate in actual communication situations. It seems reasonable to assume that quality of communication at initial stages of second language learning will depend heavily on learners´ communicative competence in their dominant language, teachers´ and learners´ motivations and attitudes, and the effective use of communication strategies by both the learner and other participants in situations of communication.