1.1.1) Phonological competence refers to the knowledge speakers have of the sounds and possible sound combinations of a language. This implies that speakers of a language can recognize the words of their language (or those who might be) by simple listening to them, i.e. a speaker of English can determine whether a word might belong to English or to another language only by listening to it.
1.1.2) Syntactic competence refers to the knowledge the speakers have about the possible syntactic combinations of their language. Usually speakers know most (if not all) of the possible combinations of their native language. e.g. a speaker of English knows that "the dog the boy bit" is not a grammatical English sentence.
1.1.3) Semantic competence refers to the knowledge speakers have of the meanings of words in their languages. Speakers know, for instance, the relationship between the word "dog" and the reality represented by this word, although there is apparently no natural connection between the two. That is why in French the same reality is represented with the word "chien" and in Spanish "perro".
1.1.4) Lexical competence refers to the knowledge speakers have of an extensive amount of words in their language. It also refers to the ability that speakers have to use these words according to the appropriate context. For instance, in the paradigm of nouns, speakers can choose from a quite extensive variety of nouns when building a sentence, however, the speakers know that in a sentence such as "the _______ died in that car-accident" only biological beings could be placed in that position because only biological things "die"; however, inanimate or non-existing nouns could fill the blank for representing abstract ideas, or other different purposes such as irony and humor (this is usually referred to as a pragmatic meta-knowledge).
1.1.5) Morphological competence refers to the knowledge speakers have of the formation of words in their language, or better said, word structure. Usually, speakers know that, in general, to create a plural noun they need to add an "s" at the end of the word. For instance, the word "table" can be pluralized into "tables". In this case, in linguistics, it is said that the word is composed by two morphemes –considered to be the minimal meaningful units in a language- which are "table-s". Speakers of languages know about word-formation in their languages. They create words, for fun or fashion, that "sound" like their languages, but that maybe they do not "officially" constitute a part of their lexicon.
1.2.- Communicative competence:
Communicative competence is a broad term that involves not only the structural features of language, but also its social, pragmatic and contextual characteristics. Therefore, it is necessary to understand communicative competence as the sum of a series of competences.
1.2.1) Grammatical competence refers to the ability to speakers have to use the different functioning rules of the system of their language. This competence, actually, is what we referred previously as linguistic competence.
1.2.2) Sociolinguistic competence refers to the ability speakers have to produce sentences according to the communicative situation. Speakers (usually) know when, where and whom to say things.
1.2.3) Discursive competence refers to the ability speakers have to be able to use the different types of discourse. Usually language users know what is being referred to in different contexts, i.e. they discern between new and old information, and are able to determine the discourse topics. For instance, speakers know when a "he" refers to "John" or to "the child" according to the text context in the sentence: John went to the park, and he found a child who was sick. The young boy was crying because he didn’t know where his mother was.
1.2.4) Strategic competence refers to the knowledge speakers have to maintain communication. Therefore, this competence accounts for the strategies language users have to be understood, and to understand others. Gestures, expressions, mimics and intonation are among others some of the most strategies used.
2.- Definition of performance
Performance is considered to be the physical representation, usually in utterances of any type, of the human competence (Chomsky, 1965). It refers to "how" someone uses language (Fromkin and Rodman, 1981). Chomsky considered performance as a faulty representation of competence because of psychological "restrictions such as memory lapses and limitations, distractions, changes of directions halfway through sentence, hesitation and so on" (Villalobos, 1992, p. 20). Performance, in a way, accounts for the failures language users have when transposing their competence into actual linguistic production.
3.- Implications of competence and performance in EFL teaching
EFL teachers who consider the elements involving both linguistic and communicative competence in a classroom setting tend to understand more the new linguistic challenges faced by students when learning an L2. Some teachers might understand, for instance, the nature of some mistakes in terms of interference from the L1. Others might interpret mistakes as the lack of cultural and social knowledge of the target language. In any case, the important point is that teachers might be able to understand better the nature of the learning process and apply certain orientations towards the syllabus design and classroom activities (Bell, 1981). Besides, a language teacher who understands and distinguishes competence from performance necessarily has a different vision of the students difficulties when learning the L2 and, as so, conceives the learners roles differently, e.g. not as a passive learner, but as an active member of the teaching-learning process (Nunan, 1991; Nunan, 1999).
4.- Some practical considerations to be observed in an EFL teaching setting
The following considerations are an attempt to simplify the acquisition of L2 competences into the mental framework of students. They are issued in terms of the activities that are considered to promote actual involvement of the students in the teaching-learning process (Nuttal, 1982; Omaggio, 1986; Wallace, 1991; Weaver, 1994).
4.1) Contextualized activities: one of the problems that may be faced by students is that out-of-context activities might frustrate the development of linguistic and communicative L2 competences. It is, therefore, of paramount importance to promote authentic activities that encourage students to see language as it actually works.
4.2) Interactive activities: interaction is considered to be a key factor in the L2 classroom. Interaction of the sort student-teacher-student is of paramount importance to the development of the linguistic and communicative competences of students. However, such interactivity must be contextualized in actual language use situations so that students understand the real purposes of language.
4.3) Professor’s Feedback: it is relevant to consider the effects of teachers’ feedback in the development of the linguistic and communicative competences in the L2 classroom setting. However, a question arises in terms of the effectiveness of correcting mistakes explicitly. This discussion is still at stake in the current literature. In this sense, it is better that teachers explore the learning strategies of each student and try to determine what they need. In any case, it is important to foster activities that involve students in cognitive processes that allow them to solve linguistic problems related to competence. At the end, they might not need explicit grammar instruction to learn the L2.
4.4) Contextual factors: it is important to account for contextual factors that are present in the teaching and learning process, i.e. the environment, the L1 linguistic competence, the authenticity of the activities, the linguistic distance between the L1 and the L2, among others.
As it was mentioned before, this is merely a short list of suggestions attempting to promote the development of both linguistic and communicative competence in students. However this list is in no way (and it does not attempt to be) the solution for helping students in developing such competences. However, the most important issue here is to consider the importance of terms such as competence and performance in real-life learning-teaching environments and the L2 pedagogical implications they acquaint for.
References
Bell, R. (1981). An introduction to applied linguistics. Approaches and methods in language teaching. London: Batsford. Academic and Educational.
Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Fromkin, V. and Rodman, R. (1983). An introduction to language. New York, NY: Holt Saunders.
O’Grady, W., Dobrovolsky, M., and Aronoff, M. (1993). Contemporary linguistics. An introduction. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.
Nunan, D. (1991). Language teaching methodology. A textbook for teachers. London: Prentice Hall International.
Nunan, D. (1999). Second language teaching & learning. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.
Nuttall, C. (1982). Teaching reading skills in a foreign language. London: Heinemann.
Omaggio, A. (1986). Teaching language in context. Proficiency-oriented instruction. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.
Wallace, M. (1991). Training foreign language teachers. A reflective approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Weaver, C. (1994). Reading process and practice (2nd. Ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Lic. Jhony M. Jaimes S.
Universidad de Los Andes. Mérida-Venezuela
Octubre, 2006
The author is currently an English teacher at the University level.
| Página siguiente |