Proficiency And Communicative Competence In L2: Implications For Teachers And

Learners
By
J. A. Ade!ile And ". F. Ala!i
Institute of Education
University of Ibadan
Ibadan, Nigeria
A!stract
The concept of proficiency as far as language is concerned has remained a relative term in
linguistic parlance. In absolute sense of it, proficiency represents an unknowable abstraction
that reflects the universal competence of native speakers; a perception that has great
consequences for the second language learners. This led to the emphasis placed on communicative
competence and learner variability from the early !"#s. $earners vary in their linguistic
competence. They are also prone to both interlingua and intralingua errors, with many having
difficulty in e%pressing their communicative intentions. This paper is therefore one attempt
aimed at providing insight into the learners& structural and grammatical problems as well as
communication strategies they employ in awareness of the gaps in their linguistic repertoire.
Introduction
The definition of proficiency as far as language is concerned has consequences for
second language learners. For second language learners, attaining native speaker
proficiency is alost a state of utopia. !ccording to "ialystok #$%%&' a proper definition of
language proficiency should present an identifiable standard against (hich to describe
language skills of users in different conte)ts. This requires a cobination of foral
structure, that is, a clear set of standards and counicative application, (hich include
recognition of variation fro the rules.
In actual sense, second language learners vary in the ultiate level of proficiency
(ith any failing to achieve target language copetence. The variability has been linked to
the fact that learners are less failiar and confident (ith the structural eleents and
conventions of the target language. The variable perforance is often characteri*ed by both
interlingual and intralingual errors that eerge as learners develop interlanguage
developent.
+oreover, as a result of the gaps in learners, linguistic repertoire, they often have
difficulty in e)pressing their counicative intentions. This, ost of the ties, akes the
adopt soe counication strategies in an attept to pass across their eaning. This
apparent structural and graatical inadequacy in learners, repertoire presents great
challenges not only to the learners but also to teachers and researchers.
Proficiency And Communicative Competence In Lanuae
The definition of language proficiency is deeply entangled in theoretical attitude
#"ialystic, $%%&'. There are the foralist approach and the functionalist approach. The
foralist sees language as code. -anguage proficiency is vie(ed as .ultiate unkno(able
abstraction that reflects the universal copetence of native speakers/ the functionalist
e)plains language as .the outcoe of social interaction in a linguistic environent,/ thus0
proficiency is e)plained in relationship to counication in specific conte)t. The t(o
perspectives are equally iportant. !ccording to +yles #1223', the cobination of foral
International 'ournal of (frican ) (frican (merican *tudies
+ol. I+, ,o. -, 'ul -##.
structure #a clear set of standards' and counicative application, (hich includes
recognition of variations fro the rules are essential to a proper definition of language
proficiency. This (ill ake the definition present identifiable standards against (hich to
describe language skills of users in different conte)ts. "ro(n #1222' opines that a ore
coplete conceptuali*ation of language perforance should therefore ackno(ledge personal
characteristics, topical or real (orld kno(ledge, and affective scheata, aong other factors
related to social and cultural conte)t.
4elating to cultural conte)t, there is variability in the process of second language
learning. -earners vary in the ultiate level of proficiency they achieve (ith any failing to
reach target language copetence. The variation is often the result of individual learner,s
difference in otivation and aptitude, aong others. In this (ise, learner varieties should be
ackno(ledged #5lein, $%%&'. It is ore useful, then to think of proficiency as a process, in
(hich learners alternate in their use of linguistic for according to the linguistic and
situational conte)t #Ellis, $%%3'.This lends credence to the functionalist perspective (hich
ephasi*es counicative copetence and learner,s variability.
The early perception of language proficiency vie(ed proficiency as little ore than
graar and le)is. 6ith the advent of counicative copetence, ho(ever, the ephasis
(as no longer on graatical aspects but also on ability to use language appropriately in
different conte)ts and the ability to organi*e thoughts through language. 7ounicative
copetence (as first proposed by 8yes #$%92' and it represents attept to develop
students, sociolinguistic and discourse copetence in addition to graatical copetence.
It (as borne out of the feelings that there is uch ore to linguistic copetence than
kno(ledge of phonology, orphology, synta) and seantics.
7hosky #$%:;' ade a distinction bet(een copetence and perforance.
<acquelyn #$%%2' vie(s copetence in the 7hoskyan anner as a syste #or systes' of
constitutive rules that provide the speaker (ith criteria to decide (hat is graatical,
acceptable and appropriate, and (hat is not. 8e argues further that 7hosky,s distinctions
bet(een copetence and perforance (as valid not only for graar but also for rules of
language. The a=or constitutive coponents of copetence therefore include #i'
graatical copetence #ii' discourse copetence, and, #iii' >ociolinguistic copetence.
?raatical copetence involves coputational aspect of language, the rules or
forulations or constraints that allo( us to pair sound (ith eaning, the rules that for
syntactic constructions or phonological or seantic patterns of varied sorts #<acquelyn,
$%%2'. @iscourse copetence deals (ith the kno(ledge of the structure of te)t, both oral
and (ritten. It is the ability to use #produce and recogni*e' coherent and cohesive te)t, oral
or (ritten. >ociolinguistic copetence has to do (ith the ability to produce, recogni*e
socially appropriate language in conte)t.
#aria!ility In The $econd Lanuae Learners% Performance
>econd language learners vary in their levels of copetence (ith any failing to
reach target language copetence. This inconsistency in learners, perforance in -1 is not
ne( to teachers. !ccording to 6illia #$%&3', this kind of variable perforance is a noral
phenoenon in second language learners. The varied perforance has been linked to social
as (ell as cognitive factors. >ociocognitive theory arries both social and cognitive factors
together as they affect second language acquisition. !ccording to sociocongitive theorists, an
e)ploration of social and cognitive factors provides soe ideas on (hy learners differ in the
rate of second language learning, in proficiency type #for instance, conversational ability
versus (riting' and in ultiate proficiency #Ellis, $%%3'.
32
International 'ournal of (frican ) (frican (merican *tudies
+ol. I+, ,o. -, 'ul -##.
Ane odel designed to account for the role of social factors in language acquisition
is ?ardner,s #$%&;' socioBeducational odel. The odel interrelates four aspects of second
language learning0 the social and cultural ilieu #(hich deterines beliefs about language
usage and culture', individual learner differences #this relates to otivation and language
aptitude', the setting #foral and, or inforal learning conte)t' and learning outcoes.
+yles #1223' believes that the follo(ing social factors can affect learner,s level of
counicative copetence in second languageC
#i' negative attitude to(ards the target language0
#ii' continued lack of progress in -10
#iii' (ide social and psychological distance bet(een the learners and target culture0
and
#iv' lack of integrative and instruental otivation for learning.
7ognitive theorists believe that counicating, oral or (ritten is an active process of
skill developent. They see acquisition as a product of cople) interaction of the linguistic
environent and the learner,s internal echanis. !ccording to +c-auglin #$%&&', (ith
practice, there is continual restructuring as learners shift the internal representations in order
to achieve increased degree of astery in second language.
!nderson,s #$%&;' odel of language production is a odel that applies to both
speaking and (riting in a second language. The odel is divided into three stagesC
7onstruction #in (hich the learner plans (hat he or she is going to (rite by brainstoring,
using indBap or outline' transforation #in (hich languages are applied to transfor
intended eaning into the for of the essage (hen a (riter is coposing or revising' and0
e)ecution #(hich corresponds to the physical process of producing the te)t. !nderson,s
theory supports teaching approaches that considers the developent of the learner #>no(,
122$'.
&rrors As $ins "f Imperfection In Learners% 'epertoire And Their Implication For
Learner
>econd language learners have varying coands of the target language. -earners
are still in the process of acquiring linguistic input that can guarantee native speaker,s
copetence. !s a result, varying degrees of error occur in learner,s production. 8o(ever,
since language is acquired and not inherited, learners are not iune to errors. These errors,
(hich represent the product of learning, also provide useful hints about the underlying
process of learning. +any of the errors are .interlingual/ #errors due to transferring rules
fro the other tongue' (hile others are Dintralingual, #errors (hich sho( that learner,s are
processing the second language'.
Earieties of error categories (ere proposed by 7order #$%9$'. 7order categori*ed
errors as preBsysteatic, systeatic and postBsysteatic. FreBsysteatic errors are those
ade by a learner (hile he or she is trying to cae togrips (ith a ne( point. >ysteatic
errors are those errors (hich occur (hen the learner has fored an inaccurate hypothesis
about the target language (hile postBsysteatic errors occur as a result of teporary
forgetting of a point previously understood.
?enerally, (hen a second language learner develops interlanguage, he or she
coits errors. !s in first language, soe of the errors are lapses, or Dslips, of the tongue
due to physical or psychological reasons. They are systeatic. >oe, on the other hand,
occur regularly and sho( the isunderstanding of the second language syste. The first
kind of error (as described by 7hosky as Dperforance error, and the later as Dcopetence
error,. 5ern #1222' believes that (hether the second language learner akes Derror, Distake,
33
International 'ournal of (frican ) (frican (merican *tudies
+ol. I+, ,o. -, 'ul -##.
or Dderailent,, a(k(ard discourse occurs because he is less failiar (ith structural eleents
and conventions of a ne( language #Target language'. !ccording to +yles #1223' soe of
the reasons for errors in learners, production areC
#i' -earners ake direct translation fro -$ or they try out (hat they assue is
legitiate structure of the target language although hindered by insufficient
kno(ledge of correct usage.
#ii' In the learning process, learners often e)perience native language interference
fro developental stages of interlingua or fro non standard eleents in
spoken dialect.
#iii' They often overgeneralise the rules for stylistic features (hen acquiring ne(
discourse structure.
#iv' Aften, learners are not sure of (hat they (ant to e)press and this engenders
erroneous production.
#v' -earners, especially (hen it coes to (riting in a second language ay lack
failiarity (ith ne( rhetorical structures and the organi*ation of ideas.
It can be presued that the follo(ing causes account for yriad of errors in second
language learners, repertoire #!nasiudu, $%%:'.
#i' AvergeneralisationsC 7ertain errors are coitted by learners because they have
not astered the rules of the target language or they apply the rules eant for
soe structures to all other structures. For e)aple, in the case of past tense
foration, a child (ho had learnt that past tense is fored by adding .ed/ ay
overgeneralise the rule by producing such (ords as Dgoed,, Dspeaked, D(eared,,
Dcoed, .
#ii' Ignorance of rule restrictionC ! rule ay see to have restrictions in a fe( cases.
For a learner to attain reasonable copetence in target language, he or she ust
aster not only the rules but also their restrictions. For e)aple, in foring
plural of nouns, a rule calls for the addition of Ds, to singular nouns. ! student
(ho is ignorant of the restriction to this rule ay go ahead to produce such
(ords as Dinforations,, Dfurnitures,, Dpeoples, or such an e)pression as C,6e
killed t(o ouses/.
#iii' Incoplete application of rulesC >oe rules are norally applied in sequence.
Errors do occur (hen such rules are not applied copletely. For e)aple, a
learner ay produce such a sentence as thisC .Everybody behaved as he likes/.
The sentence contains t(o finite verbs and both need to be in the sae tense.
(iv) Forulation of false hypothesesC The tendency aong -1 learners is to
forulate hypotheses about the target language at each stage of their learning
career. The hypotheses are progressively tested as ore data eerged in their
language e)periences. >oe of these hypotheses are proved false by further data.
For e)aple, learners ay hypothesi*e that adverbs are fored (ith the
derivational suffi) .ly/. >uch a learner can go ahead to produce e)pression as
.yours brotherly./
(v) Transfer of -earningC Frobles ay eerge as a result of the teaching strategy
eployed by the teacher. For e)aple, at the priary sentence building stage, a
teacher ay eploy substitution tables in teaching the basic sentence types. If,
for instance, a child is e)posed to the use of first person singular and plural
pronoun #.I/ and .(e/' second person singular and plural #.Gou/ and .you' and
34
International 'ournal of (frican ) (frican (merican *tudies
+ol. I+, ,o. -, 'ul -##.
third person plural #Dthey,', such a child, (hile trying to use third person singular
pronouns Dhe, or Dshe, can for a sentence such as .8e have a book/.
(vi) Error induced odelC Teachers serve as odels for students to learn fro. In
soe instances, (hen such odels ake istakes (ittingly or un(ittingly, the
learner ibibes the sae istake.
Communicative $trateies "f L2 Learners
+ost of the ties, second language learners encounter difficulty in e)pressing their
counicative intentions. This is attributable to the gaps in their linguistic repertoire. !
learner (ho is able to anticipate such difficulty ay avoid counication or try to
odify (hat he or she intends to say. Even (hen the learner is already engaged in
counication #oral or (ritten' and such difficulty is e)perienced, he or she ay resort
to an alternative (ay of getting the eaning across. These (ays of coping (ith the
counication situation is called Dcounication strategy. !ccording to 6illia #$%&3'
learners resort to the follo(ing counication strategies (hen they becoe a(are of
probles (ith (hich their current kno(ledge has difficulty in copingC
Avoidin Communication
!voidance of counicative opportunities is al(ays the (ay out (hen learners
becoe a(are of gaps or (eakness in their repertoire. Accasions (hich (ill present
difficulty are usually avoided. If it is oral, learners ay refuse to talk and if it is (riting
situation, they ay avoid (riting on topics for (hich they kno( that they lack necessary
vocabulary.
Ad(ustin the )essae
In a situation (here an e)change is already taking place, it ay be too late to eploy
avoidance tactics. !s a result, learners ay decide to alter the eaning (hich they intend to
counicate. They ay oit soe ites of inforation, ake the ideas sipler, less
precise or saying soething slightly different. In a (riting situation, learners ay decide to
go off content, that is, (riting soething that is not relevant to the given topic.
Paraphrasin
-earners ay resort to the use of paraphrase, circulocution or description in order
to e)press their intended eaning. For e)aple, a learner (ho could not recall the (ord
Dkettle, ay say Dthing that (e boil (ater in,
.
Appro*imatin
6here a learner has proble (ith recalling the right diction, he or she ay eploy
(ord or (ords (hich e)press the eaning as closely as possible to intended eaning. >uch
substitutions are often less specific than the eaning intended or out rightly inappropriate.
Creatin +e, -ords
-earners soeties create ne( (ords (hich they hope (ill e)press the intended
eaning. The ne( (ords ay be literal translation fro the eleents in a native language.
35
International 'ournal of (frican ) (frican (merican *tudies
+ol. I+, ,o. -, 'ul -##.
For e)aple, a learner ay use the e)pression Dnight eal, instead of Dsupper, and Dshoe
aker, instead of Dcobbler,.
!part fro learners, counication strategies entioned earlier, learners ay
eploy nonBlinguistic resources such as ie, gesture, or iitation. They can also s(itch to
their native language or seek help fro outside, invoking the coBoperation of the listener
either directly or indirectly by eans of hesitation.
Implications And Conclusion
Evidently, any second language learners find it difficult to attain native speaker
proficiency because they are still in the process of acquiring linguistic input in the target
language, and they are less failiar and confident (ith the structural eleents and
conventions of a ne( language. These account for variability in their levels of
counicative copetence.
The variable perforance, although considered noral, has been linked to a nuber
of factors, including social and cognitive ones (ith attendant effect on learners,
interlanguage developent. !lso, as learners develop interlanguage, they are susceptible to
both interlingual and intralingual errors. The errors represent the product of learning and
equally provide necessary insight into learners, cognitive process.
+oreover, any learners have probles in e)pressing their counicative
intentions. This is as a result of the gaps in their linguistic repertoire. If learners are able to
anticipate difficulty in counication or (hen they encounter one, they often resort to
alternative (ays of getting their eaning across. These alternative (ays such as avoidance of
counication, ad=usting essages, paraphrasing, using appro)iation, creating ne( (ords,
s(itching over to the native language, using nonBlinguistic resources or helpBseeking
easures are generally referred to as learners, counication strategy.
The kno(ledge of all the issues discussed so far and the insight provided should
assist teachers. 4ather than dra(ing conclusion about the intellectual ability of learners on
the basis of structural and graatical probles, they should accept and confront the
challenges of assisting learners to attain greater proficiency because the greater the level of
proficiency the better learners, speaking and (riting quality.
'&F&'&+C&$
!nasiudu, ".N. #$%%:'. The technique of error analysis. Effective English usage for tertiary
education.A.>. Ag(ueleka, G.!. "abatunde and 6ale Asisan(o #Eds.' -agosC
?reenline Fublishers. $H1 $3$.
!nderson, <. #$%&;'. 7ognitive psychology and its iplications. Ne( GorkC 6.8. Freean.
"ialystok, E. #$%%&' 7oing of age in applied linguistics. $anguage $earning. 3&, 3%9 ;$&.
"ro(n, 8.@. #1222'. Frinciples of -anguage learning and teaching #3
th
ed.'. 6hite Flains,
N.G.C -ongan.
7hosky, N. #$%:;'. (spects in the theory of synta%. +assachussettsC 7abridge.
Ellis, 4. #$%%3'. The *econd $anguage acquisition. A)fordC A)ford University Fress.
36
International 'ournal of (frican ) (frican (merican *tudies
+ol. I+, ,o. -, 'ul -##.
?ardner, 4. #$%&;'. *ocial /sychology and *econd language learning0 The role of attitude and
otivation. -ondonC Ed(ard !rnold.
<acquelyn, >. #$%%2'. 7ounicative copetence revisited. The development of *econd language
proficiency. ". 8arlay, !llen, F. 7uing, <. and >(ain +. #Eds.'. 7abridge
University Fress.
5ern, 4. #1222' -iteracy and -anguage. 8ong 5ong. A)ford University Fress.
5lein, 6. #$%%&'. The 7ontribution of >econd -anguage !cquisition researcher. $anguage
$earning, 3&, ;19 ;3%.
+c-auglin #$%&;'. Theories of second language learning. "altioreC Ed(ard !rnold.
+yles, <. #1223' >econd language (riting and second language acquisition. 1n *econd $anguage
2riting. T. >ilva and F. +atsuda. Eds. N.<C -a(rence Erlbau !ssociates. $%$ 122.
>no(, +.!. #122$'. 7ontent based and iersion odel of second and foreign language
teaching. Teaching English as a >econd or foreign -anguage. +. 7elceB+urcia ed.
#Hrd ed.'. "ostonC 8einle and 8einle. H2HBH$&.
6illia, -. #$%&3' Foreign and >econd -anguage -earning. -anguage acquisition research
and its iplications for the classroo. 11 H;.
37