语言学习与语言教学的原则修改版1.ppt

,Chapter 9 Communicative competence,Supervisor: Liu Baining Reporter: Lang Qian,Communicative competence,Brief introduction,The middle part of 20th century was characterized by a zeal for the scientific, linguistic analysis of the structures of the languages and for application of such analysis to behavioristic approaches to language teaching. And this research continue to be important as we head toward the 21st century. However, in the last two decades of the 20th century, a focus on communicative language teachingteaching second languages for the ultimate goal of communication with other speakers of the second language. Such a focus has centered on speaking and listening skills, on writing for specific communicative purposes, and on “authentic” reading texts. Underlying the communicative language teaching movement are a number of important theoretical principles of language behavior. So today well study these principles.,Body of communicative competence,On defining communicative competence Pragmatics Language functions Discourse analysis,On defining communicative competence,The beginning of communicative competence The development of communicative competence Some newer views about communicative competence,The beginning of communicative competence,The term “communicative competence” was coined by (1967,1972), a sociolinguist who was convinced that Chomskys notion of competence was too limited. According to Hymes, Chomskys “rule-governed creativity” that so aptly describes a childs mush-rooming grammar at the age of 3 or 4 did not account sufficiently for the social and functional rules of language.,Dell Hymes,The beginning of communicative competence,Then, communicative competence is that aspect of our competence that enables us to convey and interpret messages and to negotiate meanings interpersonally within specific contexts. Savigon notes that “communicative competence is relative, not absolute and depends on the cooperation of all the participants involved.” It is not so much an intrapersonal construct as we saw in Chomskys early writings but rather a dynamic, interpersonal construct.,Development of communicative competence,In the 1970s, research on communicative competence distinguished between linguistic and communicative competence to highlight the difference between knowledge “about” language forms and knowledge that enables a person to communicate functionally and interactively. In a small vein, James Cummins proposed a distinction between cognitive/academic language proficiency (CALP) and basic interpersonal communicative skills (BICS).,Development of communicative competence,CALP,BICS,It is the communicative capacity that all children acquire in order to be able to function in daily inter-personal exchanges.,The dimension of proficiency in which the learner manipu-lates or reflects upon the sur-face of features of language outside of the immediate in-terpersonal context. It is what learners often use in classroom exercises and tests that focus on form.,The difference between CALP and BICS: Cummins (1981) later modified his notion of CALP and BICS in the form of context-reduced and context-embedded communication, where the former resembles CALP and the latter BICS, but with the added dimension of considering the context in which language is used. For example, a good share of classroom, school-oriented language is context-reduced, while face-to-face communication with people is context-embedded.,Development of communicative competence,In Canales definition, four different components make up the construct of communicative competence. 1). Grammatical competence: It encompasses “knowledge of lexical items and of rules of morphology, syntax, sentence-grammar semantics and phonology”. 2). Discourse competence: It is the ability we have to conn- ect sentences in stretches of discourse and to form a meaningful whole out of a series of utterances. Differences between 1) and 2): The former focuses on sentence level grammar. While the latter is concerned with intersentential relationships.,The first two cate-gories reflect the use of the linguistic system itself.,Development of communicative competence,3). Sociolinguistic competence: It is the knowledge of the sociocultural rules of language and of discourse. And it also “requires an understanding of the social context in which language is used: the roles of the participants, the information they share, and the function of the inter- action.” 4). Strategic competence: Canale and Swain(1980:30) described strategic competence as the “verbal and non- verbal communication strategies that may be called into action to compensate for breakdowns in communication due to performance variables or due to insufficient com- petence.”,The last two subcate-gories define the more functional aspects of communication.,4). Strategic competence: In short, it is the competence underlying our ability to make repairs, to cope with imperfect knowledge, and to sustain communication through “paraphrases, circumlocution, repetition, hesitation, avoidance and guessing, as well as shifts in register and style”.,4). Strategic competence: from these explanations we know that all communication strategies may be thought of as arising out of a persons strategic competence. In fact, strategic competence is the way we manipulate language in order to meet communicative goals.,For example, an eloquent speaker possesses and uses a sophisticated strategic competence. Or a salesman utilizes certain strategies of communication to make a product seem irresistible.,Some newer views about communicative competence,These newer views are perhaps best captured in s (1990) schematization of what he simply calls Language Competence, as shown in following figure.,All those rules and systems that indicate what we can do with the forms of language, whether they be sentence-level rules (grammar) or rules that govern how we string sentences together (discourse).,Graphology is the pseudoscientific study and analysis of handwriting, especially in relation to human psy-chology. In the medical field, it can be used to refer to the study of hand-writing as an aid in diagnosis and tracking of diseases of the brain and nervous system.,Lyle Bachman,The ideational function is language concerned with building and maintaining a theory of experience. It includes the experiential function and the logical function,语言能力包括在语言交际过程中使用的一套具体的知识， 可以进一步划分为两大类能力，组织能力(organizational competence)和 语用能力(pragmatic competence)。前者由语法能力(Grammatical competence)和篇章能力(Textual competence)组成，后者由施为能力(Illocutionary competence)和社交语言能力(Sociolinguistic competence)构成。具体来说,施为能力是交际者在话语表达过程中结合特定语境传递和理解施为用意的能力， 社交语言能力反映了交际者对特定语言使用语境特征所决定的语用规范的敏感程度或控制能力，这一能力使得交际者能够选择适合语境的方式执行语言功能。Bachman 指出社交语言能力包括下列因素：第一，对方言和语言变体(variation)的差异敏感性；第二, 对语域(register)差异的敏感性；第三，对语言表达是否自然、地道(authentic)的敏感性；第四，解释带有文化色彩（culture-loaded）的指称和修辞手法的能力。,Knowledge structures Knowledge of the world,Strategic competence,Context of situation,Language competence Knowledge of language,Psychophysiological mechanisms,策略能力是指在具体情境下运用语言知识进行交际的心理能力(mental capacity)它是语言使用中的一个重要部分，是一种综合运用已掌握知识解决问题的能力，语言使用者的策略能力使其能将语言能力(Language competence)与知识结构(Knowledge structures)和交际情境(Context of situation)的特征联系起来。例如，当语言使用者的语言能力出现障碍时，它的策略能力会起到某种补偿作用，以保证交际的顺利进行，心理生理机制是语言交际时的一种神经和心理过程，如在接收语言的过程中使用的是视听技能，而在产生语言的过程中使用的是神经肌肉机能。,Dell Hathaway Hymes (June 7, 1927 November 13, 2009) was a linguist, sociolinguist, anthropologist, and folklorist who established disciplinary foundations for the comparative, ethnographic study of language use. His research focused upon the languages of the Pacific Northwest. He was one of the first to call the fourth subfield of anthropology “linguistic anthropology” instead of “anthropological linguistics”. The terminological shift draws attention to the fields grounding in anthropology rather than in what, by that time, had already become an autonomous discipline (linguistics). In 1972 Hymes founded the journal Language in Society and served as its editor for 22 years .,Lyle F. Bachman，世界著名语言测试学家，美国加州大学洛杉矶分校（UCLA）应用语言学及英语教学系教授。1971年在美国印第安纳大学获博士学位。是美国应用语言学学会和国际语言测试学会前主席，目前和Charles Alderson同为剑桥语言测试系列丛书主编。 Bachman 教授在语言测试、项目评估和二语习得等领域贡献卓越，著作等身。他在美国和国外机构致力于语言测试领域的项目研究，方案设计与评价，以及语言测试从业人员培训。目前他的研究兴趣包括效度验证理论，将效验模型及程序与测试用途联系起来，从事学业成就和英语学习者的学术英语水平评估，研究语言测试与二语习得研究的接口，能力与语言测试环境的辩证关系，以及教育成就评估等。,Pragmatics,Pragmatic constrains on language production and interpretation maybe loosely thought of as the effect of context on strings of linguistic events. Phone rings, a child picks up the phone Stefanie: Hello. Voice: Hi, Stef, is your mom there? S: Just a minute. cups the phone, and yells Mom! Phone ! Mom: from upstairs Im in the tub. S: Returning to the phone She cant walk now. Wanna leave a message? V: Oh, pause Ill call back later.,So in the Ss answer, confirmed to the caller that her mother was indeed home.,In a telephone con-text, this sentence is not a question that requires a yes or no answer.,Someone is on the phone who wants to talk with you.,She couldnt come to the phone.,The caller didnt res-pond “no” directly, but implicitly did so with “Ill call back later”.,Pragmatics,Second language acquisition becomes an exceedingly difficult task when these sociopragmatic or pragmalinguistic constraints are bought to bear. Some researchers have demonstrated the difficulty of teaching such conventions because of subtle cross-cultural contrasts. E.g. American: Your English is very excellent. Chinese: No, no, my English is quite poor. Therefore, in both cases the non-native English speakers misunderstood the illocutionary force (intended meaning) of the utterance within the contexts. Learning the organizational rules of a second language are almost simple when compared to the complexity of catching on to a seemingly never-ending list of pragmatic constrains.,Language functions,Forms of language generally serve specific functions. Sometimes it functioning as a question, or as a statement. But linguistic forms are not always unambiguous in their function. For example, “I cant find my umbrella,” uttered by a frustrated adult who is late for work on a rainy day may be frantic question for all in the household to join in a search. Communication may be regarded as a combination of acts, a series of elements with purpose and intent. Communica-tion is not merely an event, something that happens; its functional, purposive, and designed to bring about some effectsome change, however subtle or unobservableon the environment of hearers and speakers.,Language functions,In Austins term, communication is a series of communi-cative acts or speech acts, which are used systematically to accomplish particular purposes. Austin stressed the impor-tance of consequences, the perlocutionary force of linguistic communication. Researchers have since been led to examine communication in terms of the effect that utterance achieve. And as second language learners, they need to understand the purpose of communication, developing an awareness of what the purpose of a communicative effect is and how to achieve that purpose through linguistic forms.,Language functions,The functional approach to describing language is one that has roots in the traditions of British linguist J.R. Firth who viewed language as interactive and interpersonal, “a way of behaving and making others behave” (quoted by Berns 1984a:5). Then Michael Halliday(1973), who provided one of the best expositions of language functions, used the term to mean the purposive nature of communication, and outlined seven different functions of language.,Language functions,Seven functions,The instrumental function,The representational function,The regulatory function,The interactional function,The personal function,The heuristic function,The imaginative function,Language functions,The instrumental function serves to manipulate the environment, to cause certain events to happen. Such as, “Dont touch the stove,” or “This courts finds your guilty”. And these are communicative acts that bring about a particular function.,Language functions,The regulatory function of language is the control of events. Sometimes it is difficult to distinguish from instrumental function, regulatory functions of language are not so much unleashing of certain power as the maintenance of control. For example, “I pronounce your guilty and sentence you to three years in prison” serves as an instrumental function, but the sentence “upon good behavior, you will be eligible for parole in ten months” serves more of regulatory of function. The regulation of encounters among peopleapproval or disapproval, behavior control, setting laws and rules, are all regulatory features of language.,Language functions,The representational function is the use of language to make a statement, convey facts and knowledge, explain or reportthat is, to represent reality as one sees it. “The sun is hot,” “the President gave a speech last night,” or even “The world is flat” all serve representational functions through the last representation may be highly disputed.,Language functions,The interactional function of language serves to ensure social maintenance. “Phatic communion(应酬语),” Malinowaskis term referring to the communicative contact between and among human beings that simply allows them to establish social contact and to keep channels of communication open, is part of the interactional function of language. Successful international communication requires knowledge of slang, jargon, jokes, folklore, cultural mores, politeness and formality expectations, and other keys to social exchange.,Language functions,The personal function allows speaker to express feelings, emotions, personality, gut-level reactions. A persons individuality is usually characterized by his or her use of personal function of communication. In the personal nature of language, cognition, affect, and culture all interact in ways that have not yet been explored.,Language functions,The heuristic function involves language use to acquire knowledge, to learn about the environment. Heuristic functions are often conveyed in the form of questions that will lead to answers. Children typically make good use of heuristic function in their incessant “why” questions about the world around them. Inquiry is a heuristic methods if eliciting representations of reality from others.,Language functions,The imaginative function serves to create imaginary systems or ideas. Telling fairy tales, joking or writing a novel are all uses of the imaginative function. Using the language for the sheer pleasure of using languageas in poetry, tongue twisters, punsare also instances of ima-ginative function. Through the dimensions of language we are free to go beyond the real worlds to soar the heights of the beauty of the language itself, and through that lang-uage to create impossible dreams if we so desire.,Language functions,From these seven functions above I mentioned, the fun-ctions of language are neither discrete nor mutually ex-clusive. A single sentence or conversations might incor-porate many different functions simultaneously. Yet it is understanding of how to use linguistic forms to achieve these functions of language that comprises the crux of se-cond language learning. A learner might acquire correct word order, syntax and lexical items but not understand how to achieve a desired and intended function through careful selection of words, structure, intonation, nonver-bal signals, and astute perception of the context of a par-ticular stretch of discourse.,Language functions,If learners are attempting to acquire written as well as spoken competence in the language, they must also discern differences in forms and functions between spoken and written discourse. But in this chapter, we just focus on spoken discourse for several reasons. First, it is the most common goal of foreign language classes. Second, the teaching of writingbeyond perfunctory levels of written discourseis a highly technical task that varies greatly depending upon the goal of written discourse and upon the particular language that is in question. Third, many of the general principles of discourse analysis apply, as we have already seen, to both spoken and written modes of performance.,Discourse analysis,The analysis of the functions of language can be referred to as discourse analysis to capture the notion that language is more than sentence-level phenomenon. A single sentence can seldom be fully analyzed without considering its con-text. Both the production and the comprehension of language are a factor of our ability to perceive and process stretches of discourse, to formulate representations of meaning from not just a single sentence but referents in both previous sentences and following sentences.,Discourse analysis,Through discourse, we greet, request, agree, persuade, question, command, criticize, and much more. The sentence “I didnt like casserole” could be agreement, criticize or simply comment if we only considered sentence level surface structure. The surface structure of a sentence in the pragmatic context of total discourse, in conjunction with its prosodic features and its nonverbal features, deter-mine the actual interpretation of that single sentence. For example, as second language learners, they dont familiar with contextual discourse constraints of English might utter such a sentence or sentences like it with perfect pronunciation and perfect grammar but fail to achieve the communicative purpose.,Stress, intonation, and other phono-logical nuances,Gestures, eye contact, body language,Discourse analysis,For several decades, linguistic research focused on linguistic forms and on descriptions of the structure of language that were basically at the sentence level. In recent years the emphasis on communicative competence has shifted the focus to the discourse