Lenguaje y Comunicación • 1 E.O.I. INGLES TEMA 1: Lenguaje y comunicación. Funciones del lenguaje. La competencia comunicativa: sus componentes. Autora: Silvia Riesco Bernier (Actualizado a septiembre 2007) Contents: Email: información@preparadoresdeoposiciones.com • Web: http://www.preparadoresdeoposiciones.com 1. Introduction 2. The communicative process 2.1. Aspects of speech situation 2.2. Schematic models of communication 3. Functions of language 3.1. Formalism and functionalism 3.1.1. Formal and functional explanations of language 3.1.2. Halliday’s metafunctions 3.2. A process model of language 4. Language teaching: theoretical background 4.1. Principal methods and characteristics 4.2. Grammar Translation 4.3. Natural Method 4.4. Direct Method 4.5. Audiolingual Method 4.6. Cognitive Method 4.7. Suggestopedia 5. Communicative competence: specification of communicative competence in second and foreign language teaching 5.1. On communicative competence 5.2. Communicative Language Teaching 5.3. Communicative competence in the language classroom 5.3.1. Grammar and grammatical competence 5.3.2. Pronunciation and phonological competence 5.3.3. Vocabulary and lexical competence 5.3.4. Sociolinguistic and pragmatic competence REV.: 09/07 6. Bibliography PREPARADORES DE OPOSICIONES PARA LA ENSEÑANZA C/ Génova, 7 – 2º • 28004 Madrid Tel.: 91 308 00 32 E.O.I. INGLES Lenguaje y Comunicación • 2 1. INTRODUCTION Our students, to be able to communicate effectively in English, must bring to bear both general and linguistic capacities. The Common European Framework (2001) analysis of the former includes knowledge of the world, sociocultural knowledge, intercultural knowledge, skills and know-how, existential competence and an ability to learn. These are now mentioned in our legal framework as it contain provisions relating to language competence attainment targets and programmes of study in English for our students. By the end of the “Advanced level” (R.D. 1629/2006; L.O.E. 2/2006; B.O.C.M. 147 22/06/2007), our students are expected to have a functional knowledge of English and appropriate communicative skills to use it in both written and oral communicative situations. To achieve this result, four aspects of language instruction contribute to the mastery of English: phonetic, morphosyntactic, lexical and sociolinguistic. The first three are subsumed under the heading linguistic competence by CEF; to sociolinguistic competence, CEF adds pragmatic competence. In accordance with the aforementioned Royal Decrees, this unit will focus first on the characteristics of language and communication. Secondly, it will describe the functions of language. And, thirdly, it will concentrate on communicative competence and its factors, paying special attention to those techniques and resources we believe to be more suitable for the different stages of teaching and assessment and according to our students' characteristics and needs. 2. THE COMMUNICATIVE PROCESS 2.1. Aspects of speech situation The speech situation results from the addresser, addressee, the context, the goals, the utterance and the illocutionary act. Pragmatics is concerned with meaning in relation to a speech situation, i.e. language in context. Following the practice of Searle (1969), Leech (1983) refers to addressers and addressees as a matter of convenience as speaker and hearer. These will be speaker/writer and hearer/reader. But, according to Lyons (1977), a significant distinction can be made between a receiver (a person who receives and interprets the message) and an addressee (a person who is an intended receiver of a message). PREPARADORES DE OPOSICIONES PARA LA ENSEÑANZA C/ Génova, 7 – 2º • 28004 Madrid Tel.: 91 308 00 32 Lenguaje y Comunicación • 3 E.O.I. INGLES The context of utterance refers to the relevant aspects of the physical or social setting of an utterance. Leech considers context to be any background knowledge assumed to be shared by the speaker and hearer and which contributes to the hearer’s interpretation of what the speaker means by a given utterance. According to Halliday (1994) this is undoubtedly shaped by the context of situation (“the register”) and the context of culture (“genre”). The goals of an utterance refers to the function and intention of an utterance. And finally, the utterance is to be understood as a form of act and the product of a verbal action. Whereas grammar deals with abstract entities such as sentences and propositions, pragmatics deals with verbal acts (known as “speech acts”, cf. Searle 1969). 2.2. Schematic models of communication According to Jakobson, the model of communication includes the addresser, addresee and context, mentioned above, but also considers the message (what is being said/written), the contact (physical contact/connection between speaker and hearer) and the code (written vs. spoken). According to Systemic Functional Linguistics (Hasan 1985; Halliday and Hasan 1985; Martin 1992; Halliday 1994), communication is to be understood within the speech situation, whose components are: - - - The Field refers to the content of the message, i.e. the topic, “the nature of the social action: what it is the interactants are about”, and influences language in that it defines the degree of generality or specificity the message should display. The Tenor refers to “the statuses and role relationships: who is taking part in the interaction”, it thus shapes language by considering the nature of the participants and their relation to each other (distance and power relationships). And, the Mode refers to the role and part the text is playing, contrasting thus written vs. spoken, spontaneous vs. prepared.. PREPARADORES DE OPOSICIONES PARA LA ENSEÑANZA C/ Génova, 7 – 2º • 28004 Madrid Tel.: 91 308 00 32 E.O.I. INGLES Lenguaje y Comunicación • 4 3. FUNCTIONS OF LANGUAGE 3.1. Formalism and Functionalism As two approaches to linguistics, Formalism and Functionalism tend to be associated with very different views of nature of language. Formalists tend to regard language as a mental phenomenon (Chomsky) whereas functionalists usually regard it as a societal phenomenon (Halliday 1985). While formalists tend to explain universals as deriving from a common genetic linguistic inheritance of human species, functionalists tend to explain the universals of language as deriving from the universality of the uses to which language is put in human societies. Additionally, formalists are inclined to explain children’s acquisition of language in terms of a built-in human capacity to learn language whereas functionalists explain it in terms of the development of the child’s communicative needs and abilities in society. Above all, formalists approach language as an autonomous system. On the contrary, functionalists analyse it in relation to its social functions. 3.1.1. Formal and functional explanations of language Broadly, a formal grammatical theory such as Transformational Grammar (Chomsky 1965) defines language as a set of sentences. These sentences have meanings (senses) and pronunciation. Thus, the grammar has to define a set of mappings whereby particular senses are matched with particular pronunciations. The central level of syntax is an essential component of this complex mapping. Three levels of representation (semantics, syntax and phonology) are therefore assumed. In addition to the mapping rules, there are rules of well formedness, specifying what is well formedness or grammatical representation at each level. A functional explanation, in turn, means explaining why a given phenomenon occurs by showing what its contribution is to a larger system of which it is itself a sub system. A functional theory defines language as a form of communication and therefore is concerned with showing how language works within the larger systems of human society. When we discuss meanings of intentions, (illocutionary meanings), we talk about the purposes, goals and ends (Grice 1975, Searle 1969). PREPARADORES DE OPOSICIONES PARA LA ENSEÑANZA C/ Génova, 7 – 2º • 28004 Madrid Tel.: 91 308 00 32 E.O.I. INGLES Lenguaje y Comunicación • 5 When discussing the properties of language, the term “Function” leaves open how far the attainment of goals is due to conscious states of the individual, or for that matter, whether the goal is an attribute of the individual or the community. As an introduction, let us mention three well-known classifications of linguistic functions and later focus on Popper’s and Halliday’s. - Malinowsky’s anthropological model which classified the functions of language into two broad categories: magical (ritual use of language for social or religious activities in a particular society) vs. pragmatic (practical use of language- active and narrative). - Bühler’s interpretation which focuses more on the individual and which distinguishes the expressive use of language (oriented towards the self), the conative use (oriented towards the addressee) and the representational use (oriented towards the world). His model oriented the Prague School and was extended by Jakobson. - Jakobson’s six functions of language:referential, emotive, poetic, conative, phatic and metalingual. More specifically, Popper’s taxonomy understands that there is a progression from lower to higher functions in the evolution of human language, e.g. in more primitive communicative systems, the expressive and signalling functions of language are more frequent. • • • • Expressive function: using language expressing internal states of the individual Signalling function: using language to communicate information about internal states to other individuals Descriptive function: using language to describe the external world. Argumentative function: using language to present and evaluate arguments and explanations. Actually, there seems to be a hierarchy of linguistic theory types corresponding to those four worlds (Popper). The most basic type treats language as purely physical. The second theory type treats language as a mental phenomenon and is advocated by Chomsky and the Generative Grammar school. It should be mentioned that this theory does not handle social facts about language and cannot generalise linguistic descriptions beyond the linguistic competence of the individual. The third type, in turn, treats language as a social phenomenon (Saussure, Firth, Halliday). Saussure’s concept of language as a social institution, which exists apart PREPARADORES DE OPOSICIONES PARA LA ENSEÑANZA C/ Génova, 7 – 2º • 28004 Madrid Tel.: 91 308 00 32 E.O.I. INGLES Lenguaje y Comunicación • 6 from any particular members of the linguistic community is already halfway towards the fourth and final theory type, which regards language as an inmate of the fourth world, the world of the objective knowledge. In other wods, language exists outside the individual. Interestingly, pragmatics deals with the relation between the third and fourth world. 3.1.2. Halliday’s metafunctions Once Popper’s four language functions have been considered, let us now move onto the semantic and functional orientation of Systemic Functional Linguistics, which accounts for the intention of explaining how language is structured to be used in accordance with the contextual situation. SFL focuses on the different ways the three main functions performed by language (ideational, interpersonal and textual) are represented in the language system through the called “metafunctions” (Halliday 1985) and on how those are articulated in relation to the context of occurrence. Understanding meaning as the expression of the language functions, meaning is to be looked at in the light of the three different functions that language, according to SFL, simultaneously performs and achieves in the text. More specifically, it is said that language organises itself around two fundamental types of meaning: i.e. the ideational or reflexive related to the speaker’s or writer’s experience of the world, used to describe events or states; and the interpersonal or active related to the interaction with other people, concerned with the expression of social roles (Halliday 1994:xiii). Articulated between the two lies the third component “which breathes relevance into the other two” (ibid.), the textual function, that accounts for the actual use of language in order to organise the message both internally (within clauses and sentences/utterances, making links in itself) and externally (within the text as a whole and the situation where it is created). The three functions of the language are therefore realised in grammar through the systems of linguistic choices of the three metafunctions: ideational, interpersonal and textual. First, just a word to clarify that the ideational metafunction comprises the experiential and the logical components of language, which Popper calls “descriptive and argumentative functions” respectively. The experiential function aims at the expression of content. The selections relate to the semantic categories embodied in the linguistic structures that express the phenomena of the real world: the Processes (goings on), Participants (people/things involved in the process) and PREPARADORES DE OPOSICIONES PARA LA ENSEÑANZA C/ Génova, 7 – 2º • 28004 Madrid Tel.: 91 308 00 32 E.O.I. INGLES Lenguaje y Comunicación • 7 Circumstances of the particular meaning that is communicated. And the grammatical system by which this is achieved is TRANSITIVITY. And, the logical component, standing for some authors as the “fourth metafunction” defines complex units, e.g. the CLAUSE COMPLEX (clause relationships: expansion, projection, etc...). Secondly, the interpersonal function (named “expressive and signalling” by Popper) is the use of language to express the speaker’s roles in the interaction. It is identified with the expression of the interpersonal metafunction in lexicogrammar. The MOOD system allows the speaker to express his/her role by displaying the range of the basic speech functions (i) give information, (ii) give goods and services, (iii) demand information and (iv) demand goods and services, which are embodied in the different mood types: indicative (declarative and interrogative) and imperative. Additionally, the interpersonal meanings are expressed in the Mood structure (Mood –subject and finite- and Residue) and the modality expressed. Furthermore, in spoken discourse, the TONE system within intonation displays an interpersonal function (Halliday 1970; Halliday 1994:302). Thirdly, the textual function- related to the creation of an appropriate context for the expression of ideational and interpersonal meanings- is associated to the lexicogrammatical choices in the textual metafunction, where the speakers organise the message, structure the information of a text and relate the different parts of discourse to construct a whole. The expression of textual meanings in the clause is achieved by the system of THEME (in written language) and INFORMATION STRUCTURE (in spoken language) at a structural level, and COHESION (Halliday and Hasan 1976) at a non-structural level. 3.2. A process model of language We shall build how the interpersonal and textual prgamatics fit into the overall functional view of langauge so as to represent both the speaker’s and hearer’s ends of the communicative process. A linguistic act of communication (an utterance) is described as constituting a transaction on three different grounds (a) an interpersonal transaction or discourse, (b) an indeational transaction or message transmission, and (c) a textual transaction or text. But these are ordered such that the discourse includes the message, and the message includes the text. The model Leech adopts is functional: it shows how the various elements of grammar and rhetoric contribute to the functioning of language in the service of goal-directed behaviour. PREPARADORES DE OPOSICIONES PARA LA ENSEÑANZA C/ Génova, 7 – 2º • 28004 Madrid Tel.: 91 308 00 32 Lenguaje y Comunicación • 8 E.O.I. INGLES 4. LANGUAGE TEACHING: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND Changes in language teaching methods throughout history have reflected recognition of changes in the kind of proficiency learners need such as move towards oral proficiency rather than reading comprehension as the goal of language study and have also reflected changes in theories of the nature of language and of language learning. First, a number of principal methods of second language teaching are described. Later, we will focus on how “communicative competence” has gradually been integrated as a crucial ingredient in language teaching. 4.1. Principal methods and characteristics Essentially, the various methods involve at their foundations one or more of four basic ideas: translation, situational context participation, linguistic analysis and learning psychology. - Translation involves providing comparable native language words, phrases, sentences, for unkown target language items. - Situational context participation involves the use of the target language in actual or simulated situations in which the student participates. - Linguistic analysis concerns the application of linguistic knowledge either indirectly through the selection, organization and grading of target language materials or directly in the actual teaching of studends involves a consideration of learning psychology. Obviously, teaching methods differ on a number of other characteristics in addition to those outlined: skills emphasized, the use of spontaneous language materials in the target language, features involved, etc... 4.2. Grammar Translation The Grammar Translation method (hereafter, GT) essentially involves two components, the explicit study of grammatical rules and vocabulary and the use of translation. Translation is the oldest of the components. By the 18th century, grammar had already become a full partner in the method, even to the extent of being included in the name. Rules are explained by the teacher, then memorized and recited and applied by the student. The aim of GT has changed over the years. Originally, it had two principal aims: the study of the literature of the second language and the PREPARADORES DE OPOSICIONES PARA LA ENSEÑANZA C/ Génova, 7 – 2º • 28004 Madrid Tel.: 91 308 00 32 E.O.I. INGLES Lenguaje y Comunicación • 9 development of analytical skills. The 20th c. has seen three main changes in grammatical explanations: the neogrammarial prescrptivist approach, the structural approach and the transformational approach. 4.3. Natural Method The Natural Method developed as a reaction to GT and grew more vigorously in France with inspiration from the work of Rousseau. The method took its name from what is considered to be the natural way to learn a language, by exposure to language that is used in ordinary personal communicative situations. Its model was the child’s learning a first language where grammar is not taught and translation is irrelevant. On the contrary, it is claimed that students learn through conversation. 4.4. Direct Method The DM became established towards the end of the 19th c. and reached the height of its influence in the first quarter of the 20th century. It also developed as a reaction against GT. It, too, emphasized the learning of speech, acquiring meaning in environmental context and learning grammar through induction. The advocates of the DM, while approving of NM, sought to improve upon it by providing systematic procedures based on scientific knowledge of linguistics and psycholinguistics. There was considerably less use of spontaneous language as a result. Materials were selected and graded and oral pattern drills and dialogues for memorisation were devised. 4.5. Audiolingual Method The Audiolingual Method is the direct successor to the DM, for aside from incorporating structural linguistic theory and behavioristic psychology into foundation, the ALM significantly differs from DM only in emphasis. The ALM was developed during World War II and reached its height of influence during the fifties and sixties (Fries 1945 and Lado 1964). It preferred drills to the natural use of language in context. It was this lack of attention to the communicative use of language that stimulated the growth of a number of methods which do emphasize the environmental aspects, e.g. Communicty language learning and the Silent Way. The former regards the second language learning situation from the point of view of small group dynamics where the teacher takes the role of a counselor who fosters interaction. On the contrary, in the latter the PREPARADORES DE OPOSICIONES PARA LA ENSEÑANZA C/ Génova, 7 – 2º • 28004 Madrid Tel.: 91 308 00 32 E.O.I. INGLES Lenguaje y Comunicación • 10 teacher is almost entirely silent so as to develop the students’ productive speaking competence. 4.6. Cognitive Code Embodied in Ausubel’s works, The Cognitive Code arose in the sixties as reaction to the ALM. Linguists within the CC are mentalist in their philosophy, advocates of Generative Grammar and eclectic in methodology. They developed little in the way of a distinctive method. 4.7. Suggestopedia According to Lozanov (its founder), in 24 days, second language students can learn 1800 words, speak within the framework of a whole essential grammar and read any text. These remarkable achievements can be gained through a state of hypermnesia in which memory powers and other abilities related to language learning are increased remarkably. Teaching involves the presentation of dialogues and vocabulary which the student is to study and memorize. The materials are presented first in written then spoken forms. A translation is offered along with the written form. The unique aspect of teaching lies in the way materials are presented in conjunction with certain learners. 5. COMMUNICATIVE COMPETENCE AND SECOND AND FOREIGN LANGUAGE TEACHING Back to the Bloomfieldian American Structuralism, linguistics was exclusively the study of language structure and the classification of forms of language without reference to the categories of meaning. Then, in the late fifties, Chomsky published his Syntactic Structures and this event heralded the arrival of transformational generative grammar. TG is a revolution in the aims of linguistic theory. Taxonomic classifications of structures is no longer considered adequate and were concerned with developing systems of rules which account for the structural possibilities of a language. The language teacher’s emphasis on mastery of structure is, then, parallelled by a similar emphasis within linguistics. And in both fields a parallel reaction has taken place. It is a reaction against the view of language as a set of structures: it is a reaction towards the view of language as communication, a view in which meaning and the uses to which language is put play a central part. PREPARADORES DE OPOSICIONES PARA LA ENSEÑANZA C/ Génova, 7 – 2º • 28004 Madrid Tel.: 91 308 00 32 Lenguaje y Comunicación • 11 E.O.I. INGLES 5.1. On Communicative Competence In traditional approaches to language teaching, the degree of proficiency that our students achieved was described in terms of their 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 in order to make use of it rather than know about it. If we believe that people learn languages so that they can communicate with one another we must study what exactly constitutes proficiency in a foreign language. Chomsky (1965) defined language as a set of sentences, each finite in length and constructed out of a finite set of elements. Able speakers have a subconscious knowledge of the grammar rules of their language which allows them to make sentences in that language. This linguistic competence is the knowledge of a language and what the linguist should be concerned with, while linguistic performance is the knowledge of a finite set of rules which enables the language user to produce an infinite set of sentences. Chomsky associates his views of “competence” and “performance” with the Saussurean conception of langue (the priviledged ground of structure) and parole (the residual realm of variation). However, far from understanding language as a formal system and convinced that competence means far more than “grammatical knowledge”, Hymes (1972) feels a linguistic theory should develop to provide a more constituitive role for sociocultural factors, deal with a heterogeneous speech community and differential competence. Furthermore, performance is an imperfect reflection of the underlying system. Therefore, Chomsky’s dychotomy competence/performance is further subdivided into “linguistic competence” (producing and understanding grammatically correct sentences) and “communicative competence” (producing and understanding sentences that are appropriate and acceptable to a particular situation). Communicative competence is indeed the knowledge of other types of rules related to the referential and social meaning of language: the rules of use. Speakers need a social and cultural knowledge to understand and use linguistic forms. When native speakers speak, not only do they utter grammatically correct forms, but also know 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 replaced it with his own concept of communicative competence. Hymes distinguished four aspects of this competence: systematic potential; appropriacy; occurrence; feasibility. PREPARADORES DE OPOSICIONES PARA LA ENSEÑANZA C/ Génova, 7 – 2º • 28004 Madrid Tel.: 91 308 00 32 Lenguaje y Comunicación • 12 E.O.I. INGLES (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) 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. Appropriacy means that the native speaker knows what language is appropriate in a given situation. This choice is based on the following variables, among others: setting, participants, purpose, channel and topic. Occurrence means that the native speaker knows how often something is said in the language and act accordingly. Feasibility means that the native speaker knows whether something is possible in the language. Even if there is no grammatical rule to ban 20-adjective prehead constructions we know that these constructions are not possible in the language. 5.2. Communicative Language Teaching The areas contributing to CLT are many. It is possible however to consider these under three and very overlapping headings: the sociological (i.e. the ethnography, ethnomethodology and antropology of speaking- Hymes, Gumper), the philosophical (concerned with what the structure of language tells us about the structure of the mind- Austin, Grice, Searle) and the linguistic (generative semantics, applied linguistics, discourse analysis in functional texts and semantic networks). Relating language to extra-linguistic phenomena is what links the world of Halliday to Hymes in a common tradition. And just as for Halliday and Hymes, we can only understand language if we view it in this way so it may be that we can only really teach language if we present and practise it in relation to its uses. It is on that belief that CLT is based. In other words, the instrumentality of language teaching. CLT is generally accpeted as the norm in the field but subject to many interpretations. Its five distinctive features are: - emphasis on learning to communicate through interaction in the target language - introduction to authentic texts into the learning situation - provision of opportunities to focus, not only on language but on learning process - enhancement of learners’ own personal experiences - link learning in class with language activation outside class. PREPARADORES DE OPOSICIONES PARA LA ENSEÑANZA C/ Génova, 7 – 2º • 28004 Madrid Tel.: 91 308 00 32 Lenguaje y Comunicación • 13 E.O.I. INGLES 5.3. Communicative competence in the language classroom Undoubtedly, Hymes’s work was of great influence among English language teachers as it coincided with (i) the dissatisfaction with the structural approaches and (ii) the elaboration of a functional/situational syllabus set up by the Council of Europe. The main goal for English Language Teaching (hence, ELT) became to enable learners to interact successfully with other members of other societies, which was materialised in the different components of communicative competence: linguistic competence, pragmatic competence, discourse competence, strategic competence and fluency (cf. Canale and Swain 1980). The communicative approach to language teaching is based on the development of communicative language ability. Therefore, communicative practice constitutes an essential part of the learning process in the ELT classroom where (i) the language should be a means to an end, (ii) the content should be determined by the learner, (iii) there must be a negotiation of meaning between speakers, (iv) there should be an information gap and (v) the teacher’s intervention to correct should be minimal (Hedge 2000:57). Altogether, the above ingredients result in Communicative Language Teaching (cf. Widdowson 1978), orientated towards the teaching of appropriateness (communicative competence) along with the linguistic skills (linguistic competence). The direct implications of Communicative Language Teaching (hereafter, CLT) are involving learners in tasks that require face-to-face interaction, and giving students practice in communicating and negotiating meanings, i.e. “learn to communicate by communicating” (Larsen-Freeman 1986:131). Canale and Swain provided in 1980 a specification of communicative competence which included three intercommunicating factors. Canale later subdivided one of these factors (pragmatic competence), listing a total of four areas of knowledge and skills: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) Grammatical competence is the mastery of the language code. Sociolinguistic competence is the appropriateness of utterances with respect to both meaning and form. Discourse competence is the mastery of how to combine grammatical forms and meanings to achieve unity of a spoken or written text. Strategic competence is the mastery of verbal and nonverbal communication strategies used to compensate for breakdowns in communication, and to make communication more effective. PREPARADORES DE OPOSICIONES PARA LA ENSEÑANZA C/ Génova, 7 – 2º • 28004 Madrid Tel.: 91 308 00 32 Lenguaje y Comunicación • 14 E.O.I. INGLES These four categories have been adapted for teaching purposes. Thus, Royal Decrees which establish the teaching requirements for Primary and Secondary Education, and English Distance Learning (That's English!) nationwide see communicative competence as comprising five subcompetences: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) grammar competence discourse competence sociolinguistic competence strategic competence sociocultural competence Finally, the Common European Framework for Languages has established the componential analysis we will follow. 5.3.1. Grammar and grammatical competence The view of grammar that emerged from that model had the following features (Kerr 1996): grammar is at the centre of language learning grammar is concerned with isolated sentences grammar is concerned mainly with verbs grammar is acquired through practice of previously presented rules - grammar is independent of lexis - For the realisation of their communicative intentions, our students must be able to use their grammatical competence, i.e., they must be able, according to the Common European Framework, to understand and express meanings by producing and recognising well-formed phrases and sentences in accordance with the principles governing the assembly of grammatical elements. As the grammar of any language is extremely complex one of our roles as teachers will be, following the R.D. 1629/2006, the B.O.C.M. 147 22/06/2007 and the Common European Framework, to consider and state which morphosyntactical elements our students need for effective communication according to their level. 5.3.2. Pronunciation and phonological competence Nowadays, the Communicative approach emphasizes the attainment of a threshold level of pronunciation (intelligibility), rather than a native-like performance. Its techniques and resources include (Ur 1996): listen and imitate; phonetic training; minimal pair drills; contextualized minimal PREPARADORES DE OPOSICIONES PARA LA ENSEÑANZA C/ Génova, 7 – 2º • 28004 Madrid Tel.: 91 308 00 32 Lenguaje y Comunicación • 15 E.O.I. INGLES pairs; visual aids; tongue twisters; vowel shifts; stress shifts; reading aloud; recording of learners' production, etc. For the realisation of their communicative intentions, our students, following R.D. 1629/2006, the B.O.C.M. 147 22/06/2007 and the Common European Framework Specifications, must have knowledge of, and skill in the production of phonemes and allophones; distinctive features; phonetic composition of words; prosody (suprasegmental features) and phonetic reduction (connected speech). 5.3.3. Vocabulary and Lexical competence The traditional view of vocabulary was heavily dominated by the dictionary. Students think of it as a list of individual words that they try to memorise. However, current developments in language teaching and applied linguistics have forced us to change this word-by-word, form-totranslation idea of vocabulary. Research seems to point out that lexical items – single word forms, fixed expressions such as sentential formulas, phrasal idioms, fixed frames, fixed collocations, etc., and grammatical forms belonging to closed word classes (Common European Framework)- are arranged in a number of associative networks. These networks can be activated in different ways: semantic fields, similar spelling and/or pronunciation, more idiosyncratic factors, et cetera. Other variables, such as word frequency and recency of use, will also affect our retrieval and recognition systems. For the realisation of their communicative intentions, our students must be able to use their lexical competence, i.e., they must, following the Common European Framework, have the knowledge of, and ability to use, the vocabulary of English organised into functions, notions and semantic fields. 5.3.4. Sociolinguistic and Pragmatic competence Sociolinguistics can be defined as the study of all aspects of the relationship between society and language (Crystal 2003). These social factors may include social class, age, gender, ethnic origin, etc. The Common European Framework gives a detailed list of those aspects of sociocultural competence which are linguistic in nature and therefore sociolinguistic: (i) markers of social relations; (ii) politeness conventions; (iii) expressions of folk-wisdom; (iv) register differences; and (v) dialect and accent. PREPARADORES DE OPOSICIONES PARA LA ENSEÑANZA C/ Génova, 7 – 2º • 28004 Madrid Tel.: 91 308 00 32 E.O.I. INGLES Lenguaje y Comunicación • 16 Pragmatics studies language from the point of view of the users. Crystal (2003) mentions three factors: (i) the choices we make; (ii) the constraints we encounter in social interaction; and (iii) the effect we have on other participants. For Richards et al. (1992), pragmatics includes the study of: (i) how the interpretation and use of utterances depends on knowledge of the real world; (ii) how speakers understand and use speech acts; and (iii) how the structure of sentences is influenced by the relation between speaker and hearer. The Common European Framework considers that pragmatic competence is concerned with the principles according to which messages are: (i) organised; (ii) used in communication; and (iii) sequenced. Following this threefold nature, pragmatic competence will be divided into o Discourse competence has to do with the ordering of elements in terms of: (i) the information structure of a sentence/utterance; (ii) natural sequencing and (iii) discourse structure. o Functional competence is concerned with the use of language for particular purposes. o Design competence is defined by CEF as the knowledge of and ability to use the schemata that underlie communication (i.e. structured sequence of actions in which participants take turns to interact). More recently, the B.O.C.M. 147 (22/06/2007) acknowledges that communicative competence results from o Linguistic competence: grammar, discourse, lexis, phonology and spelling o Pragmatic competence: functional (in that it teaches language so as to express an intention or a particular function) and discoursive (in that it expresses such functions through texts- spoken or written) o Sociolinguistic competence: the social use of language according to the context of occurrence (situation and culture) o Strategic: which refers to communication strategies (to repair communication breakdowns) and to learning strategies. To conclude, it can be said that teachers are invited to follow a communicative approach to language teaching today. However, it should PREPARADORES DE OPOSICIONES PARA LA ENSEÑANZA C/ Génova, 7 – 2º • 28004 Madrid Tel.: 91 308 00 32 E.O.I. INGLES Lenguaje y Comunicación • 17 be borne in mind that the effectiveness of a method, according to Richards and Rodgers (1986), requires empirical validation independent of the motivating theory or its supposed effects. In the final analysis, a method can be judged successful only if it is successful, i.e. empirical research is necessary to make an objective assessment in this regard. 6. BIBLIOGRAPHY Austin, J. L. 1962. How to do things with words. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Canale, M. and M. Swain 1980. “Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing” in Applied Linguistics 1: 1-47. Chomsky, N. 1965. Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Council of Europe, (2001). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Cambridge: CUP. Crystal, D. (2003). A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. Oxford: Blackwell. Fries, C. 1945. Teaching and Learning English as a Foreign Language. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Halliday, M. A. K. 1970. A Course in Spoken English: Intonation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Halliday, M. A. K. 1985/1994/2004. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold. Halliday, M. A. K. and R. Hasan 1985. Language, Context and Text: Aspects of Language in Social-Semiotic Perspective. Geelong, Vic: Deakin University Press. Hasan, R. 1985/1989. Linguistics, Language and Verbal Art. Geelong, Vic: Deakin University Press; Oxford University Press. Hymes, D. H. 1972. “On communicative competence” in J.B. Pride and J. Holmes (Eds.), Sociolinguistics. Harmondsworth: Penguin, pp. 269293. Kerr, P. (1996). “Grammar for Trainee Teachers” in J. Willis & D. Willis, Challenge and Change in Language Teaching. Oxford: Heinemann. Lado, R. 1964. Language Teaching: A Scientific Approach. New York: McGraw Hill. Larsen-Freeman, D. 1986. Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Leech, G. N. 1983. Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman. Lyons, J. 1977. Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Martin, J. R. 1992. English Text: System and Structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. PREPARADORES DE OPOSICIONES PARA LA ENSEÑANZA C/ Génova, 7 – 2º • 28004 Madrid Tel.: 91 308 00 32 REV.: 09/07 Email: información@preparadoresdeoposiciones.com • Web: http://www.preparadoresdeoposiciones.com E.O.I. INGLES Lenguaje y Comunicación • 18 Richards J. C. and T.S. Rogers 1986. Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching. Cambridge: CUP. Richards, J.C., Platt, J. & Platt, H. (1992). Dictionary of Language Teaching & Applied Linguistics. Harlow: Longman. Saussure, F. 1931. Cours de Lingüistique Genérale, Paris. Searle, J. 1969. Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ur, P. (1996). A Course in Language Teaching. Cambridge. CUP. Widdowson, H. 1978. Teaching Language as Communication, Oxford: Oxford University Press. PREPARADORES DE OPOSICIONES PARA LA ENSEÑANZA C/ Génova, 7 – 2º • 28004 Madrid Tel.: 91 308 00 32