Review on Communicative Competence

The term communicative competence is comprised of two words, the

combination by which it means competence to communicate. Competence refers to
one’s underlying knowledge of a system, event, or fact. It is a non-observable,
idealized ability to do something. Concerning language, hence, competence is one’s
knowledge of the language system itself. Communicative competence then is a term
in linguistics that refers to a language user's grammatical knowledge of syntax,
morphology, phonology, and the like, as well as social knowledge about how and
when to use utterances appropriately. In other words, it is the ability of an individual
to use appropriately a certain language for effective communication.

The idea of communicative competence was originally derived from

Chomsky’s distinction between competence and performance. He defined
competence as shared knowledge of ideal speaker-listener set in a completely
homogenous speech community while performance is the process of applying
underlying knowledge to actual language use. However, according to Hymes (1972),
Chomsky’s view is too narrow to describe language behavior as a whole thus,
Hymes (1972) defined and first introduce communicative competence as a
sociolinguistic concept which refers to the level of language learning that enables
language users to convey their messages to others and to understand others’
messages within specific contexts. It also implies the language learners’ ability to
relate what is learnt in the classroom to the outside world. Hymes (1972) described
the competent language user as the one who knows when, where and how to use
language appropriately rather than merely knowing how to produce accurate
grammatical structures.

In an attempt to clarify the concept of communicative competence,

Widdowson (1983) made a distinction between competence and capacity. In his
definition of these two notions, he applied insights that he gained in discourse
analysis and pragmatics. In this respect, he defined communicative competence, in
terms of the knowledge of linguistic and sociolinguistic conventions. Under capacity,
which he often referred to as procedural or communicative capacity, he understood
the ability to use knowledge as means of creating meaning in a language. According
to him, ability is not a component of competence. It does not turn into competence,
but remains as “an active force for continuing creativity”, i.e. a force for the
realization of what Halliday called the “meaning potential”. Having defined
communicative competence in this way, Widdowson is said to be the first who in his
reflections on the relationship between competence and performance gave more
attention to performance or real language use.
Canale & Swain, (1980) strongly believe that the study of grammatical
competence is as essential to the study of communicative competence as is the
study of sociolinguistic competence. They were later developed the ideas of Hymes
 and introduced a theoretical model of ‘communicative competence’ that consists of
four domains of knowledge and skills.

Grammatical Competence Sociolinguistic Competence

(Words and Rules) (Appropriateness)
The ability to recognize and produce the It refers to the language user’s ability to
distinctive grammatical structures of a produce and understand language in
language and to use them effectively in different social contexts.
communication. Sociolinguistic competence asks: Which
Linguistic competence asks: What words do words and phrases fit this setting and this
I use? How do I put them into phrases and topic? How can I express a specific attitude
sentences? Canale and Swain's Model
whenof Communicative
I need to?
Discourse Competence Competence Strategic Competence
(Cohesion and Coherence) (Use of communicative strategies)
The ability we have to connect sentences The ability of using language to achieve
in stretches of discourse and to form a communicative goals and enhance the
meaningful series of utterances. effectiveness of communication.
Discourse competence asks: How are Strategic competence asks: How do I know
words, phrases and sentences put together when I’ve misunderstood or when someone
to create conversations, speeches, misunderstood me? What do I say then?
articles?

Bachman suggested a new model of communicative competence called

‘Communicative language ability’(CLA) in the late 1980s which was later slightly
modified by Bachman and Palmer in the mid-1990s (Bagaric & Djigunovic 2007).
CLA is made up of two important components: (1) language knowledge and (2)
strategic competence. Language knowledge consists of two major parts:
organizational knowledge and pragmatic knowledge. Organizational knowledge
controls formal language structures in order to make or understand utterances or
sentences that are grammatically acceptable (grammatical knowledge), and to
organize these utterances or sentences into oral and written texts (textural
knowledge). Pragmatic knowledge refers to abilities for creating and interpreting
discourse. On the other hand, Bachman and Palmer defined strategic knowledge as
a set of metacognitive components which enable language user involvement in goal
setting, assessment of communicative sources, and planning.

Language Competence

Language Knowledge Strategic Knowledge

(metacognitive components
and strategies)
Organizational Knowledge Pragmatic Knowledge

Grammatical Textual Illocutionary Sociolinguistic

 Bachman and Palmer’s model of communicative competence is multi-
disciplinary and quite complex in nature. Moreover, it defines communicative
competence in the contexts of language assessment rather than instruction (Furkó
2016).
Communicative Competence: Related Studies
Xue’s (2013) qualitative study investigated Chinese international students’
attitude to group work., and the results revealed that their involvement in group work
had a positive impact on their communicative abilities. Safranj (2009) carried out a
longitudinal study spanning over three years to investigate self-perceived
communicative competence (SPCC) of Engineering students who were doing
General English and English for specific purpose. The results revealed that the
students were aware of their improved communicative competence.
Gómez Palacio’s (2010) mixed-methods study suggests independent
reading, storytelling, roleplaying, information gap activities and peer tutoring as
effective strategies to improve ESL students’ communicative competence, while
Chesebro et al.’s (1992) large scale quantitative study found that academically
at-risk students are more nervous about communicating with others, and the
result of Nguyen and Le’s (2012) qualitative study revealed that language tests do
not always measure learners’ communicative competence in the target language.

Conclusion
The term communicative competence coined by linguist Dell Hymes which
grew out of resistance to the concept of Noam Chomsky and followed by related
studies of Widdowson, Bachman and Palmer has both implied knowledge of a
language and the ability to use it effectively. Furthermore, a language user needs to
use the language not only correctly but also appropriately.

References:
Abdulrahman, N., Abu-Ayyash, E. (2019). Linguistic competence, Communicative
Competence and Interactional Competence.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/337306343_Linguistic_competence_Communicativ
e_Competence_and_Interactional_Competence
Saleh, S. (2013). Understanding Communicative Competence.
https://bulletin.zu.edu.ly/issue_n15_3/Contents/E_07.pdf
Bagarić, V., Djigunović, J. (2007) DEFINING COMMUNICATIVE COMPETENCE.
https://Bagaric_i_Mihaljevic_Djigunovic_ENG.pdf
Gupta. S. (2011). Competence and Performance.
https://www.slideshare.net/mobile/sahilgupta/ling-prez-2
Kashir H. (2014). Communicative Competence.
https://www.slideshare.net/BilalYaseen1/communicative-competence-final-ppt