© 1989 by Oxford University Press
Articles |
Communicative Competence as Language Use
University of Edinburgh
At the heart of the communicative competence model put forward by Hymes (1971) is, it is argued, a systematic ambiguity in that it appears to mean both the decontextualized, displaced language ability associated with the views of Bernstein (elaborated code), Donaldson (decentration), Wells (hypotheses), and Cummins (CALP), and the interpersonal, socializing, context-dependent language ability associated with the views of (again) Bernstein (restricted code), (again) Cummins (BICS), Frake (asking rituals), etc. What has become clear is that such dichotomies are untenable and that either they hide a divisive political construct (for example, that communicative competence means an élite code) or they argue for the addition of one or more domains, for example, writing, or simply for the role of language in education. Communicative competence was presented as an explanatory framework for failure. It did not explain, it may have described. The paper argues for a view of communicative competence as language use, a lesser but more readily achievable ambition, achievable both in theory and in pedagogy.
![]()
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
Y.-A. Lee Towards Respecification of Communicative Competence: Condition of L2 Instruction or its Objective? Applied Linguistics, September 1, 2006; 27(3): 349 - 376. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
