Communicative Competence

Due to the fact that the final goal of language learning is communication, it is not surprising that communicative competence has gained a lot of attention in the field of second language acquisition lately. Communicative competence can be defined as “the extent to which utterances are produced and understood appropriately in different sociolinguistic contexts” (Ellis, 2008, p. 171). In other words, communicative competence is the ability to communicate effectively with others.

Communicative competence is may include different aspects. According to Ellis (2008) it has two components: linguistic competence, and pragmatic competence. The linguistic aspect of language learning can be seen as the knowledge of the language itself, including grammar, and vocabulary. Conversely, pragmatic competence is broader and less clear. It involves sociopragmatic and pragmalinguistic competences. Sociopragmatic competence is the perception of “when it is appropriate to perform a particular illocutionary act” (p. 171) such as greeting, request, apology, refusal, complaint, thanking, suggestion, criticism, or disagreement. On the other hand, pragmalinguistic competence is the ability to use a proper verbal and nonverbal form in a given situation.

Similarly, Cortazzi and Jin (2009) analysed five aspects of communicative competence: grammatical, sociolinguistic, discourse, strategic, and intercultural. The last one has been recognized as a crucial component of communicative competence. Martin described it as “social effectiveness (i.e., the ability to achieve instrumental and social goals) and appropriateness (i.e., suitable communication in a given situation in a particular culture)” (as cited in Cortazzi, & Jin, 2009, p. 198).

The importance of communicative competence for the success of all kind of speakers, natives, non-natives, EFL, and ESL learners, is clear. The question, then, is how to equip students with communicative competence. Even though there is not a perfect formula, the growing research on this field of linguistics has showed that explicit pragmatic instruction is more effective that an implicit approach. Bardovi-Harling emphasised this idea by stating that “without input, acquisition cannot take place” (as cited in McLean, 2004, p. 77). It is important that teachers give students as many opportunities as possible to learn and practise pragmatic skills. Besides, explicit consciousness-raising instruction is crucial since it is not possible for teachers to cover all the possible range of pragmatic issues. Awareness about cultural differences and similarities can enhance student’s communicative competence, and thus enable them to have successful relationships.

References

Cortazzi, M., & Jin, L. (2009). Cultural mirrors: materials and methods in the EFL classroom. In E. Hinkel (Ed), Culture in second language teaching and learning (pp. 196-219). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Ellis, R. (2008). The study of second language acquisition. (2^nd ed.). Oxford: UOP.

McLean, T. (2004). In the classroom/En clase: Giving students a fighting chance: Pragmatics in the language classroom. TESL Canada Journal/Revue TESL du Canada, 21(2), 72-92.