ther countries which traded in, and used slaves. Foreign and second language teaching is also profitable in large urban areas of Canada, a former dominion possession of Great Britain, and the U.S.A., the world’s most massive economic giant whose corporate prevalence and cultural hegemony in Latin America are indisputable.
My principal goal, in this paper, is to examine one of the current and most popular approaches to language teaching, the communicative approach, whose proponents pursue the following important major objective: assisting learners to produce language as a central feature of their social interaction for the purpose of performing tasks which are important or essential to their everyday existence. A principal foundation to fulfilling this objective is development of communicative competence, which is presented as more representative of the learner’s language capabilities than Noam Chomsky’s linguistic competence.
I argue that if proponents of C.L.T. are to fulfil their objective legitimately or validly, they should not do so by employing communicative competence as their basis. I propose, instead, that they use the Frierian approach, conscientizacao, for the purpose of helping learners acquire foreign and second languages. In order for me to perform my tasks appropriately, I must examine two views of competence, Noam Chomsky’s linguistic competence, as well as, applied linguistic views of communicative competence. Once my examination is complete, I shall make my case for conscientizacao.
LINGUISTIC AND COMMUNICATIVE COMPETENCE
I shall show that because of the significant incompatibility between Chomsky’s and communicative views of language, the communicativists should not employ communicative competence as a legitimate basis to helping students produce target language, effectively. Let me immediately state some of the prominent and enduring applied linguistic views of communicative competence.
It is to ideas of Savignon ( 1985, p. 130 ) and Canale and Swain ( 1980, pp. 27 - 31 ) that I turn, in order to perform my initial task. Savignon views communicative competence as :
...the ability to function in a truly communicative setting - that is a dynamic exchange in which linguistic competence must adapt itself to the total information input, both linguistic and paralinguistic of one or more interlocutors. Communicative competence includes grammatical competence ( sentence level grammar ), socio-linguistic competence ( an understanding of the social context in which language is used ), discourse competence ( an understanding of how utterances are strung together to form a meaningful whole ), and strategic competence ( a language user’s employment of strategies to make the best use of what s/he knows about how a language works, in order to interpret, express, and negotiate meaning in a given context ).
Canale and Swain say communicative competence is composed minimally of grammatical competence, sociolinguistic competence, and communication strategies or strategic competence. The first includes knowledge of the lexical items and rules of morphology, syntax, sentence grammar, semantics, and phonology. The second consists of two sets of rules, socio - cultural rules of use and rules of discourse, knowledge of both of which, is crucial to interpreting utterances for social meaning particularly when “there is a low level of transparency between the literal meaning of an utterance and the speaker’s intention.”
Str
本论文由英语论文网提供整理,提供论文代写,英语论文代写,代写论文,代写英语论文,代写留学生论文,代写英文论文,留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。