Topic 4 – The communicative competence. Analysis of its components.

1. INTRODUCTION.. 3

1.1. SAUSSURE’S PAIRS OF OPPOSED CONCEPTS. 3

1.1.1. Diachrony vs synchrony. 3

1.1.2. Langage vs langue vs parole. 3

1.1.3. Signifiant vs signifié. 3

1.1.4. Syntagmatic vs paradigmatic. 4

2. CHOMSKY’S THEORY OF COMPETENCE AND PERFORMANCE. 4

3. DELL HYMES’ COMMUNICATIVE COMPETENCE THEORY. 5

3.1. Ideas opposed to Chomsky. 5

3.2. Chomsky’s performance is a dustbin concept. 5

3.3. Communicative Competence: 5

4. EVOLUTION OF THE CONCEPT OFCOMPETENCE AND ITS ELEMENTS. 6

4.1. HALLIDAY. 6

4.2. CANALE AND SWAIN’S THEORY. 6

4.2.1. Language. 6

4.2.2. Communicative Competence. 6

4.3. SAVIGNON’S THEORY. 7

4.4. LARSEN-FREEMAN’S THEORY. 7

4.5. BACHMAN AND PALMER (1982). 8

4.6. FAERSCH, HAASTRUP AND PUILLIPSON.. 10

5. MEC THEORY OF COMMUNICATIVE COMPETENCE AND ITS ELEMENTS. 10

6. TOPIC BASED UNIT.. 13

6.1. BASIC ELEMENTS. 13

6.2. GLOBAL AIM… 13

6.3. TEACHING METHODOLOGICAL MODEL.. 13

6.3.1. General principles. 13

6.3.2. Guidelines. 14

6.3.3. Teaching model. 14

6.4. ACTIVITIES. 15

1. INTRODUCTION. 16

2. CHOMSKY’S THEORY OF COMPETENCE AND PERFORMANCE. 16

3. DELL HYMES’ COMMUNICATIVE COMPETENCE THEORY. 16

4. Evolution of the concept of communicative competence and its elements. 17

4.1. CANALE AND SWAIN’S THEORY.. 17

4.2. SAVIGNON’S THEORY. 17

4.3. LARSEN-FREEMAN’S THEORY.. 17

4.4. BACHMAN AND PALMER’S THEORY. 18

4.5. FAERCH, HAASTRUP AND PHILLIPSON’S THEORY. 18

4.6. MEC theory. 19

5. Cuestiones Básicas. 20

5.1. Competence and performance. 20

5.2. Hymes’s communicative competence. 20

5.3. Savignon’s theory. 20

5.4. Canale and swain’s theory. 21

5.5. MEC THEORY. 21

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. SAUSSURE’S PAIRS OF OPPOSED CONCEPTS.

One of the first people to analyze in depth the characteristics of language as a system was Saussure.

Some of Saussure’s most central ideas were expressed in the form of pairs of concepts:

· diachrony vs synchrony

· langage vs langue vs parole

· signifiant vs signifié

· syntagmatic vs paradigmatic

1.1.1. Diachrony vs synchrony.

He sharply distinguished historical (‘diachronic’) and non-historical (‘synchronic) approaches to language study. The former sees language as a continually changing medium; the latter sees it as a living whole, existing as a state at a particular moment in time.

1.1.2. Langage vs langue vs parole.

‘Langage’ is the faculty of speech present in all normal human beings due to heredity (our ability to talk to each other). This facult is composed of two aspects:

1. ‘langue’ (the language system): the social shared knowledge, the linguistic knowledge. It’s quite similar to Chomsky’s competence.

2. ‘Parole’: the actual act of speaking on the part of a person. It’s a dynamic, social activity in particular time and place. It’s the same as performance.

1.1.3. Signifiant vs signifié.

The relationship between the two is arbitrary.

1. signifiant’: the sound image

2. signifié : the thing signified, or concept’.

The relationship between them both forms a linguistic sign: the basic unit of communication. “langue” is a systen of signs.

1.1.4. Syntagmatic vs paradigmatic

1. Syntagmatic: when the signs are seen in a linear sequence.

2. Paradigmatic: when a sign that is present is seen as contrasting with other signs in the language.

Language was then seen as a system of signs at three levels:

· phonology

· morphosyntax

· lexis

Chomsky’s theory of competence and performance is similar to Saussure’s dichotomy between lange and parole.. However, the mastery of this knowledge is not enough for those learners who want to study a foreign language in order to make use of it rather than know about it, and that’s why we study Hymes and his notion of communicative competence.

2. CHOMSKY’S THEORY OF COMPETENCE AND PERFORMANCE.

Chomsky defined language as a set of sentences, each finite in length and constructed out of a finite set of elements. Generative Transformational Grammar, was an explicit description of the ideal speaker-hearer’s intrinsic competence.

1. Competence: the object of study of the GGT. The knowledge of an ideal speaker-hearer in a completely homogeneous community. It’s the unconcious knowledge. He makes no mistakes. He’s an individual, whereas Sausseare’s langue is a social knowledge.

2. Performance: the actual use of that competence. It’s the same as parole.

3. DELL HYMES’ COMMUNICATIVE COMPETENCE THEORY.

3.1. Ideas opposed to Chomsky.

Dell Hymes pointed out that linguistic competence could not explain on its own the actual rules of use. Neither could performance, because it included no mention whatsoever of social interaction.

Hymes believed that a different theory of language was needed because when a speaker uses language he does not only utter grammatically correct forms, he also knows where and when to use these sentences and to whom. Hymes then said that competence by itself is not enough to explain a native speaker’s knowledge. Chomsky agreed, and due to this criticism, he made his first expansion of the term competence: linguistic and pragmatic.

3.2. Chomsky’s performance is a dustbin concept.

He said that whatever you couldn’t explain was considered performance to Chomsky.

3.3. Communicative Competence:

He wanted to design a theory that could deal with language in real use. Tthis theory would include interactional components: communicative competence and would be a theory of language users and use.

The communicative competence is the ability to know whether to what extent something is possible, feasible, apprropriate and its occurrence.

1. Possible: we know whether something in the language is possible or not (if there’s rule to ban it or not).

2. Feasible: we know whether something is possible in the language even if there’s no rule to ban it.

3. Apprropriate: we know if something is appropriate in a given context: participants, social relationships, setting, scene, form, topic, purpose, key, genre, channel, code, interactional norms and interpretation norms.

4. Occurrence: we know how often something is said in the language and act accordingly.

4. EVOLUTION OF THE CONCEPT OFCOMPETENCE AND ITS ELEMENTS.

4.1. HALLIDAY.

He rejects the whole idea , because for him, there’s no point in in studying the ideal speaker-hearer, when what counts is the actual use of lanuage by speakers.

4.2. CANALE AND SWAIN’S THEORY.

4.2.1. Language

They are theoriticians who are interested in applied linguistics. A linguistic theory is to be made explicit in order to sustain an applied linguistic theory, and for them, language:

1. Is a form of social interaction: even if you don’t perceive any function it has the phatic one (to check that the listener is there).

2. It involves a high degree of unpredictability and creativity.

3. It takes place in social contexts, which provide constraints on its use and gives clues for its interpretation.

4. It occurs under limiting psychological and other conditions such as memory constraint…

5. It involves authentic language

6. It’s purposeful

7. It’s successful or not depending on the actual outcomes: if you fulfill the message’s purpose or not.

4.2.2. Communicative Competence.

Canale and Swain provided a specification of communicative competence and its intercommunicative factors:

1. Grammatical competence: the mastery of the linguistic code. The same as Chomsky’s competence.

2. Sociolinguistic competence: the apprropriatness of utterances with respect to meaning and form.

3. Discourse competence: the combination of grammatical form and meaning to achieve unity of a text. the structure of the text.

4. Strategic competence: the use of verbal and non-verbal strategies to compensate for breakdowns in communication, and to make communication more effective.

4.3. SAVIGNON’S THEORY.

She says that there’s an interdependence between these four factors.

The strategic component is a key component for learners: it’s present from the very beginning of language learning

4.4. LARSEN-FREEMAN’S THEORY.

Her notion of communicative competence includes the following elements:

· Linguistic rules

· Functions and speech acts

· Propositional content

· Interactional patterns

· Strategic patterns

1. Linguistic rules: they include Chomsy’s competence, discourse and paralinguistic features.

2. Functions or speech acts:

· Speaker: if he’s the most important element in the communication: Emotive function.

· Listener: conative

· Context: referencial

· Channel: phatic

· Message: poetic

· Code: metalinguistic.

Speech acts is a synonymous with function. Austin was the 1st to draw attention to the many functions performed in utterances when people are communicating:

· Performative: an utterance that performs an act: to say is to act. They can be explicit (with a performative verb:”warn”…) or implicit.

· Constative: utterances which assert something that is either true or false.

To study the effect of utterances on the behaviour of speaker and hearer in speech acts this distinction is used:

· locutionary acts: the saying of something which is meaningful and can be understood. It can be performative or constative.

· illocutionary acts: using a sentence to perform a function. The negotiation will be complete if the other part understands our intention and fulfils it.

· perlocutionary acts: the result or effect that is produced by means of saying something

Instead of the three-part distiction, we usually use a two-part distinction between the propositional content of a sentence (the propositions a sentence implies) and the illocutionary force (intended effects).

3. Propositional content: the meaning of a sentence which affirms or denies something and can be true or false.

4. Interactional patterns: it has to do with the relationshipswhich may arise during the process of negotiating meaning.

· Adjacent pairs: things that go together. (”thank you→you’re welcome).

· IRF Pattern (Iniciation Response Follow Up): structures which go together: saying goodbye in Spanish.

5. Strategic patterns: similar to Canale’s strategic competence.

4.5. BACHMAN AND PALMER (1982)

They are based on Canale and Swain’s model, but divide the communicative competence into:

1. Grammatical competence:

· Morphology

· Syntax

2. Pragmatic competence:

· Vocabulary

· Cohesion

· Textual organization.

3. Sociolinguistic competence:

· The register

· Nativeness: ability to use those features which are more culturally related.

· Nonliteral language: ability to read between the lines.

A text is a pragmatic unit. Halliday describes the language in terms of: textual organization and cohesive devices.

1. Cohesion refers to the relations of meaning that exist within a text, and that define it as a text:

· Reference: (co-interpretation). There’s a semantic link between the reference item and what it presupones: its interpretation depends on the presupposed. The reference can be: exophora (situational) or endophora (textual: anaphora, to the preceding text, and cataphora, to the following one).

· Substitution: The relation between the linguistic items: it’s the replacement of one item by another.

· Ellipsis: when the speaker leaves out a sound, a morpheme or a word in the act of speaking.

· Lexical cohesion: Lexical reiteration: the repetition of a lexical item; and lexical collocation: those lexical items which tend to go together.

· Conjunction

2. Textual:

· Thematic structure: gives the clause its character as a message. There’s a close relation between information structure and thematic structure.

· Given/new: Given +New and Theme +Rheme are not the same thing: they imply two kinds of prominence. Theme + rheme are speaker-oriented. Given + new is listener-oriented.

4.6. FAERSCH, HAASTRUP AND PUILLIPSON

For them the communicative competence consists of:

1. Phonology/orthography.

2. Grammar.

3. Lexis.

4. Pragmatics.

5. Discourse.

6. Communication strategies.

7. Fluency

5. MEC THEORY OF COMMUNICATIVE COMPETENCE AND ITS ELEMENTS.

Tere are 3 types of contents:

1. concepts:

· topics

· functions

· grammar

· vocabulary

2. skills:

· listening/speaking/readind/writing

· discovering learning strategies

· groupings

3. attitudes:

· attitudes

· standards

· values

The aim of our teaching. is the acquisition of communicative competence. This communicative competence has been analyzed following Canale’s classification.

These four categories have been adapted for teaching purposes. Thus, Royal Decree 1006/1991, of 14 June (BOE 25 June), which establishes the teaching requirements for Primary Education nationwide sees communicative competence as comprising five subcompetences:

1. –grammar competence : capacidad de poner en práctica unidades y reglas de funcionamiento del sistema de la lengua.

2. –discourse competence : capacidad de utilizar diferentes tipos de discurso y organizarlos en función de la situación comunicativa y de los interlocutores

3. –sociolinguistic competence : capacidad de adecuar loe enunciados a un contexto concreto, atendiendo a los usos aceptados en una comunidad lingüística determinada).

4. Strategic competence: capacidad para definir, corregir, matizar o realizar ajustes en el curso de la situación comunicativa.

5. sociocultural competence: cierto grado de familiaridad con el contexto social y cultural en que se utiliza una determinada lengua.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Biggs, J.B., and Moore, P.J. The process of learning (3rd ed) Prentice Hall. Sysney, 1993

2. Brewster, J., Ellis, G. and Girard, D. The Primary English Teacher’s Guide. Penguin. London 1992.

3. Crystal, D. The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language. CUP. Cambridge, 1987.

4. Ellis, R. Understanding Seeond Language Acguisition. OUP. Oxford, 1985.

5. Encyclopaedia Britannica. Enc. Brit. Inc. Chicago, 1990.

6. Materiales para la Reforma. Secundaria. MEC. Madrid, 1992.

7. Propuesta de Secuencia. Lenguas Extranjeras. MEC-Escuela Española. Madrid, 1993.

8. Richards, J.C., Platt, J., and Platt, H. Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics. Longman. London, 1992

9. Steinberg, D.D. Psycholinguistics. Longman. London, 1982.

10. Yalden, J. Principies of Course Design for Language Teaching. CUP. Cambridge, 1987.


6. TOPIC BASED UNIT

6.1. BASIC ELEMENTS

Our pupils are now studying lst of BUP or 3rd of ESO.

6.2. GLOBAL AIM

Our main aim ¡s to get our pupils to use the system of the English sentence for communication.

6.3. TEACHING METHODOLOGICAL MODEL

6.3.1. General principles.

In our methodological approach, emphasis will be placed on activities in which pupils use language for communicative purposes. So we’ll try that pupils get a variety of activities which foster both learning and acquisition.

Communicative competence consists of:

1. grammar competence

2. pragmaticcompetence:

· discourse

· strategic

3. sociolinguistic competence

4. sociocultural competence

The main role we play is that of ganiser. We start the ball rolling by telling our pupils what they are going to talk, read, write or speak about; get the activity going by helping those with problems and finally organize feedback. This lesson planning will be planned on the basis of achieving a balance between:

· language input (presentation)

· practice

· communicative output (production)

6.3.2. Guidelines.

We must get a balance betweem:

· Training our students for communicative efficiency.

· Acquisition and communicative activities are more effective.

· A programme with a variety of activities will motivate our students more.

· We must be adaptable and flexible.

6.3.3. Teaching model.

According to Penny Ur any generalization about the best way to teach grammar will have to take into account:

· range of knowledge and skills to be taught

· varieties of structures labelled ‘grammar’

She suggests the following organization (Gramrnar Practice Activities.CUP, 1988):

1. Presentation: to get the pupils to perceive the structure and get it into their short term memory..

2. Isolation and explanation: our pupils must understand the rules that govern the structure

3. Practice: Our pupils must absorb the structure thoroughly, ie, to trasfer what they know from short to long-term memory. We have many techniques for this:

· Manipulation without relating to meaning: slot-fillers, transforrnations

· Meaning as well: translation, matching, meaning related or multiple choice slot fillers

· Production and/or cornprehension for sorne nonlinguistic purpose: information gap, opinion gap, ludic activities (games)

4. Assessment: Its main goal is to provide feedback.

Practice is vital, and its primarily aim is to consolidate learning: our pupil modifies and improves his or her mental constructs moving from his or her origin language towards English through several intermediate steps or interlanguages.

To sum it up we can say that during practice the material is absorbed into long term memory and the learner is able to understand and produce examples with gradually lessening teacher-support. The activities we are going to see will soon lead into the production or comprehension of meanigs for some non linguistic purpose, while keeping an eye on the way the structures are being manipulated in this process.

These activities should be based on a task that has clear objectives and entails active use of the structure being practised; and it should maintain learner interest through careful choice of topic

6.4. ACTIVITIES

((((EN HAND_OUT)))

1. Subject and object questions

2. Market research

3. A train timetable

4. an impossible interview

5. a student railcard


ESQUEMA

COMPETENCIA COMUNICATIVA. ANÁLISIS DE SUS COMPONENTES.

1. INTRODUCTION.

In traditional approaches to language tcaching, the degree of proficiency that a learner achieves is described in terms of his mastery of the system of the language at three levels: phonology, morphosyntax and lexis. It is obvious that this kind of knowledge is not adequate in itself for those learners who want to learn a foreign language to communicate.

Saussure’s pairs:

Diachrony-(historical approach to language)- synchrony (non historical)

Langue (the language system)- parole (the act of speaking)

Signifiant-(the sound images) signifie (the concept)

Syntagnmatic (the relation of asign with those in the sentence)- paradigmatic (vertical rel)

2. CHOMSKY’S THEORY OF COMPETENCE AND PERFORMANCE.

Chomsky (1957) defined language as a set of sentences, each finite in length and constructed out a set of finite elements.

Competence is what the speaker knows and what the linguist should be concerned with. Performance is what the speaker says or writes at any given time and what the inguist should not be concerned with.

3. DELL HYMES’ COMMUNICATIVE COMPETENCE THEORY.

However, Dell Hymes thought that Chomsky had missed out some very important iformation: the rules of use. When a native speaker speaks he does not only utter grammatically ) correct forms, he also knows where and when to use these sentences and to whom. Hymes, then said, that competence by itself is not enough to explain a native speaker’s knowledge, and he replaced it with his own concept of communicative competence. Hymes distinguished four aspects:

1. Systematic potential means that the native speaker possesses a system that has a potential for creating a lot of language. This is similar to Chomsky’s competence.

2. Appropriacy means that the speaker knows what is appropiate in a given situation.

3. Occurrence: the nativ espeaker knows how often something is possible in the language.

4. Feasibility: the native speaker knows whether something is possible in the language.

4. Evolution of the concept of communicative competence and its elements.

4.1. CANALE AND SWAIN’S THEORY

Canale and Swain provided in 1980 a specification of communicative competence which included 4 intercommunicating factors:

1. Grammatical competence is the mastery of the language code.

2. Sociolinguistic competence is the appropriateness of utterances with respect to both meaning anf form.

3. Discourse competence is the mastery of how to combine grammatical forms and meanings – to achieve unity of a spoken or written text.

4. Strategic competence is the mastery of verbal and non-verbal communication strategies used to compensate for breakdowns in communication, and to make communication more effective.

4.2. SAVIGNON’S THEORY.

She proposes a relationship, and interaction between Canale’s four factors.

4.3. LARSEN-FREEMAN’S THEORY

1. linguistic rules

2. functions or speech

3. propositional content

4. interactional patterns

5. strategic competence

4.4. BACHMAN AND PALMER’S THEORY.

Lyle Bachman and Adrina Palmer posit three components of communicative competence based on Canale and Swain’s model:

1. Grammatical competence:

· Morphology

· syntax

2. pragmatic competence:

· vocabulary

· cohesion

· organization

3. sociolinguistic competence:

· register

· nativeness

· nonliteral language.

4.5. FAERCH, HAASTRUP AND PHILLIPSON’S THEORY.

For them, communicative competence consists of:

1. Phonology/orthography

2. grammar

3. lexis

4. pragmatics

5. discourse

6. communication strategies

7. fluency

4.6. MEC theory.

These four categories have been adapted for teaching purposes. Thus, Royal Decree 1006/1991, of 14 June (BOE 25 June), which establishes the teaching requirements for Primary Education nationwide sees communicative competence as comprising five subcompetences:

1. grammar competence (competencia gramatical, o capacidad de poner en práctica las unidades y reglas de funcionamiento del sistema de la lengua).

2. discourse competence (competencia discursiva, o capacidad de utilizar diferentes tipos de discurso y organizarlos en función de la situación comunicativa y de los interlocutores)

3. sociolinguistic competence (competencia sociolingüística, o capacidad de adecuar los enunciados a un contexto concreto, atendiendo a los usos aceptados en una comunidad lingüística determinada).

4. strategic competence (competencia estratégica, o capacidad para definir, corregir, matizar o realizar ajustes en el curso de la situación comunicativa).

5. sociocultural competence (competencia sociocultural, entendida como un cierto grado de familiaridad con el contexto social y cultural en el que se utiliza una determinada lengua).

5. Cuestiones Básicas

5.1. Competence and performance.

Chomsky defined language as a set of sentences, each finite in length and constructed out of a finite set of elements. Grammar, a generative grammar, was an explicit description of the ideal speaker-hearer’s intrinsic competence. This linguistic competence was, therefore, a subconscious or tacit knowledge of the grammar rules of a language which allows us to make sentences.

Clearly this ability does not require any conscious or explicit knowledge. In fact we learn the oral-aural expression of our mother tongue without any formal instruction and the instruction we receive to learn the visual-written part of language will normally cover a minute fraction of the immense field of language.

Linguistic competence must cover not only the ability to repeat or understand already heard sentences but also the ability to produce and understand new utterances. Because of this we cannot say that languagc is a set, no matter how big, of utterances that have actually occurred. Any utterance will not qualify as a sentence in competence. To avoid the problem of ill-formed utterances, Chomsky introduced the concept of linguistic performance. While linguistic competence is the tacit knowledge of the language, linguistic performance is the use of language in concrete situations.

5.2. Hymes’s communicative competence.

Hymes’s theory of communicative competence involves judgements of four kinds, thus linking linguistic theory and society:

1. systematic potential

2. appropriacy

3. occurrence

4. feasibility

5.3. Savignon’s theory.

Savignon proposes a relationship and interaction hetween Canale’s four factors.

5.4. Canale and swain’s theory.

Canale and Swain provided in 1980 a specification of communicative competence which was based on a metastudy (study of previous studies):

1. It is a form of social interaction.

2. It involves a high degree of unpredictability and creativity.

3. It takes place in discourse and sociocultural contexts.

4. It is carried out under limiting psychological and other conditions such as memory constraints, fatigue and other distractions.

5. It always has a purpose.

6. It involves authentic language.

7. it is judged as successful or not on the basis of actual outcomes.

For them communicative competence consists of the following elements:

1. Grammatical competence: the mastery of the linguistic code. ( like Chomsky’s competence).

2. Sociolinguistic competence: the appropriatness of utterances with respect to both meaning and form.

3. Discourse competence: how to combine grammatical form and meanings to achieve unity of a spoken or written text.

4. Strategic competence: the mastery of verbal and non-verbal communication strategies used to compensate for breakdowns in communication, and to make communication more effective.

5.5. MEC THEORY.

Thus, Royal Decree 1006/1991, of 14 June (BOE 25 June), which establishes the teaching requirements for Primary Education nationwide sees communicative competence as comprising five subcompetences:

1. grammar competence (competencia gramatical, o capacidad de poner en práctica las unidades y reglas de funcionamiento del sistema de la lengua).

2. discourse competence (competencia discursiva, o capacidad de utilizar diferentes tipos de discurso y organizarlos en función de la situación comunicativa y de los interlocutores).

3. sociolinguistic competence (competencia sociolingüística, o capacidad de adecuar los enunciados a un contexto concreto, atendiendo a los usos aceptados en una comunidad lingüística determinada).

4. strategic competence (competencia estratégica> o capacidad para definir, corregir, matizar o, en general, realizar ajustes en el curso de la situación comunicativa).

5. sociocultural competence (competencia sociocultural, entendida como un cieno grado de familiaridad con el contexto social y cultural en el que se utiliza una determinada lengua).

Publicado: marzo 13, 2019 por Laura Gonzalez

Etiquetas: tema 4 inglés secundaria