English Department

Module: Further training 1

Trainer: I. Lachguar

Communicative Competence
Introduction:

The introduction of the construct communicative competence in discussions of

second/foreign language proficiency dates from the early 1970s. Although the
term itself may have been new, the underlying concept it represented was in
fact rather straightforward: if the purpose of language study is language use,
then the development of language proficiency should be guided and evaluated
by the learner’s ability to communicate. In naturalistic (non-classroom)
settings, human language communication of course takes both oral and written
forms and develops in one or more languages wherever social interaction
occurs. Given the 1960s academic theories in linguistics and learning
psychology upon which the prevailing recommendations for classroom
language teaching methods and materials were based, however, the
introduction of communicative competence as a guide for the teaching and
evaluation of learners proved nothing short of revolutionary. Early advocates
were met with skepticism, if not outright hostility. This brief summary
considers the underlying support, both theoretical and empirical, for
communicative competence as a goal of 21st-century second/foreign language
pedagogy and evaluation along with the implications of the construct for
shaping classroom practice in the many different contexts in which English is
taught.
Background:

Chomsky, 1965:

Linguistic theory is concerned primarily with an ideal speaker-listener, in a

completely homogeneous speech community, who knows its language
perfectly and is unaffected by such grammatically irrelevant conditions as
memory limitations, distractions, shifts of attention and interest, and errors
(random or characteristic) in applying his knowledge of the language in actual
performance.

Linguistic Competence is somewhat similar to Saussure’s concept of language

and parole. Competence refers to the native speaker’s knowledge of his
language, the system of rules, and his ability to produce and understand. It is
an underlying mental system underlying actual behavior, linguistic institution
ability to analyze language, ignoring mistakes, understanding new sentences,
even producing new sentences.

Performance is the study of the system of rules; performance is the study of

actual sentences themselves, of the actual use of the language in real-life
situation.

In a nut shell, Competence is a set of principles which a speaker masters,

performance is what a speaker does. As competence is a kind of code,
performance is an act of encoding or decoding.

On Communicative Competence:

Dell Hymes, 1972:

There are rules of use without which the rules of grammar would be useless.

Savignon, 1972:

She expressed her disapproval at Chomsky’s idea of using the concept of

idealized, purely linguistic competence.

«Communicative competence is not only an inherent grammatical competence

but also is the ability to use grammatical competence in a variety of
communicative situations… »
Savignon, 1983:

She defines communicative competence as the ability to function in a truly

communicative setting – that is, in a dynamic exchange in which linguistic
competence must adapt itself to the total informational input, both linguistic
and paralinguistic, of one or more interlocutors. It is more inter-personal than
intra-personal and relative rather than absolute. It is largely defined by context.

Widdowson, 1983:

He distinguishes competence as the knowledge of linguistic and socio-linguistic

conventions from capacity that he considers procedural; i.e. the ability to use
language as means of creating meaning in language.

Canale and Swain, 1980:

They define competence as a synthesis of an underlying system of knowledge

and skill needed for communication; whereas Knowledge is the conscious and
unconscious knowledge of an individual about language and about other
aspects of language use. They distinguish three types of knowledge:

 Knowledge of underlying grammatical principles.

 knowledge of how to use language in social context in order to fulfill
communicative functions.
 knowledge of how to combine utterances and communicative
functions with respect to discourse principles.

Canale and Swain also introduced skill in communicative competence. It is how

an individual can use the knowledge in actual communication.

Models of Communicative Competence:

 The model of Dell Hymes, 1972

 The model of Canale and Swain, 1983

 The model of Bachman and Palmer, 1996

 The model of Okvir, 2005

The Model of Hymes, 1972:

Communicative
Competence

Linguistic Competence Sociolinguistic Competence Discourse Competence Strategic Competence

It takes into account the

the correct usage of comprises cohesion and co requisite skill to actually
grammatical principles like the careful selection of herence. Cohesion involves apply the knowledge of
syntax, phonetics, words and phrases that linking different sentences language and ability
morphology, vocabulary beautifully fit into a in a text to with regards to (performance) along with
during communication particular place, the a common structure. background information
between two language discussion topic, and your Coherence links different on cultural framework and
users. interlocutor. sentences of a discourse by social taboos in order to
similar logic, relevance and overthrow communication
meaning. gaps.

The Model of Canale and Swain, 1983

Communicative Competence

Linguistic Sociolinguistic Discourse Strategic

Competence Competence Competence Competence

It takes into account the requisite

the correct usage of the careful comprises cohesion and c skill to actually apply the
grammatical principles selection of words oherence. Cohesion knowledge of language and
and phrases that involves linking different ability (performance) along with
like syntax, phonetics,
beautifully fit into a sentences in a text to background information on
morphology, vocabulary cultural framework and social
during communication particular place, with regards to a
the discussion common structure. taboos in order to overthrow
between two language communication gaps.
users. topic, and your Coherence links different
interlocutor. sentences of a discourse
by similar logic,
relevance and meaning.
The Model of Bachman and Palmer, 1996:

Language Knowledge

Organisational Pragmatic

TEXTUAL: Functional:
GRAMMATICAL: Ideational, Sociolinguistic:
Cohesion, rhetoric
Vocab, syntax, and conversational manipulative,
Dialects and lge
phonology , organiation, heuristic functions;
varieties; registers;
imaginative cultural references
graphology, etc natural and idioms
functions. and figures of
speech.l

The Model of Okvir, 2005:

Communicative
Competence

Language Competence Pragmatic Competence Sociolinguistic Competence

Language Discourse language

rules and competence variation and
language and functional language
proficiency competence varieties

Implications of Communicative Competence in ELT: Savignon

 Along with a general acceptance of the complexity and interrelatedness of skills in

both written and oral communication and of the need for learners to have the
experience of communication, to participate in the interpretation, expression, and
negotiation of meaning, newer, more comprehensive theories of language and
language behavior came to replace those that had looked to American structuralism
and behaviorist psychology for support.
  Acceptance of communicative criteria entails a commitment to address admittedly
complex issues such as: how should form and function be integrated in an instructional
sequence? What is an appropriate norm for learners? How is language proficiency to
be measured? Equally important, it requires a new focus on teacher education to
ensure that teachers themselves have the communicative competence to provide
learners with the kinds of spontaneous interaction they need.
 The development of communicative competence, findings overwhelmingly support the
integration of form-focused exercises with meaning-focused experience. Grammar is
important; and learners seem to focus best on grammar when it relates to their
communicative needs and experiences.
 The selection of a methodology appropriate to the attainment of communicative
competence requires an understanding of sociocultural differences in styles of
learning.
 Communicative language teaching (CLT) is an approach that understands language to
be inseparable from individual identity and social behaviour. Not only does language
define a community but a community, in turn, defines the forms and uses of language.

References:

Canale, M., and Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical Bases of Communicative

Approaches to Second Language Teaching and Testing, Applied Linguistics, 1(1),
1-47.

Chomsky, N. (1965). Syntactic Structures.

Hymes, D. (1972). On Communicative Competence. In J. Pride and J. holmes

(Eds.), Sociolinguistics (pp. 269-93) Harmondsworth, England: Pinguin Books.

Savignon, S.J. (1983). Communicative Competence: Theory of Classroom

Practice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.