Reviewer in Critical Survey

Discuss the following:

1. Communicative Competence
Communicative competence is a term in linguistics which refers to a language user's grammatical knowledge
of syntax, morphology, phonology and the like, as well as social knowledge about how and when to use utterances
appropriately. The term communicative competence refers to both the tacit knowledge of a language and the
ability to use it effectively
The term was coined by Dell Hymes in 1966,[1] reacting against the perceived inadequacy of Noam Chomsky's
(1965) distinction between linguistic competence and performance.[2] To address Chomsky's abstract notion of
competence, Hymes undertook ethnographic exploration of communicative competence that included
"communicative form and function in integral relation to each other".[3] The approach pioneered by Hymes is now
known as the ethnography of communication.
Communicative competence was further defined in four components:
1. Linguistic competence- knowing how to use the syntax and vocabulary of a language.
2. Sociolinguistic competence-knowing how to respond to language appropriately, given the setting, the topic,
and the relationships among the people.
3. Discourse Competence-knowing how to interpret the larger context and how to construct long stretches of
language so the parts make up a coherent whole.
4. Strategic Competence- knowing how to recognize and repair communication breakdowns, how to work
around gaps in one’s knowledge of language and how to learn more about the language in context.

2. Linguistic Competence
Linguistic competences are related to the use of language through the expression and interpretation of
concepts, thoughts, feelings, facts, and opinions in order to perform oral and written discussions. Such interactions
may take place in diverse social and cultural contexts, which will determine the characteristics of the language
written or spoken, such as the grammar, pragmatic, and sociolinguistic characteristics.
Linguistic competences are highly related to communication competences and they are even seen as equal.
Within scientific production and communication, linguistic competences are related to the adequate use of language,
especially written, and they are characterized by: (1) the adequate use of written language and structuring of
content; (2) reading and writing of scientific documents in the reader’s native language; and (3) reading, writing, and
translation of documents to other non-native languages, particularly in the most used (e.g., English), translation may
not indicate a complete proficiency of another language, but it must be good enough to allow its reading and
interpretation.
Linguistic competences are also related to information competences, because the correct writing of scientific
documents and the description of research findings demand the demonstration of information seeking, selection,
compilation, and processing competences, which are supported in the comprehension and production of scientific
texts for diverse audiences. Linguistic competences involve a set of skills, knowledge, and attitudes that are
interrelated and mutually supported in order to conduct a successful scientific communication that may be destined
to different communities or audiences (scientific or the general public), who will be able to understand the
communicated knowledge and even use it, provided that they have been correctly materialized from a linguistic
point of view.

3. Stephen Krashen’s Comprehensible Input

The Input hypothesis is Krashen's attempt to explain how the learner acquires a second language – how second
language acquisition takes place. The Input hypothesis is only concerned with 'acquisition', not 'learning'. According
to this hypothesis, the learner improves and progresses along the 'natural order' when he/she receives second
language 'input' that is one step beyond his/her current stage of linguistic competence. For example, if a learner is at
a stage 'i', then acquisition takes place when he/she is exposed to 'Comprehensible Input' that belongs to level 'i +
1'. Since not all of the learners can be at the same level of linguistic competence at the same time, Krashen
suggests that natural communicative input is the key to designing a syllabus, ensuring in this way that each learner
will receive some 'i + 1' input that is appropriate for his/her current stage of linguistic competence.

4. Speech Act Theory.

Speech act theory is a subfield of pragmatics that studies how words are used not only to present information but
also to carry out actions.
The speech act theory was introduced by Oxford philosopher J.L. Austin in How to Do Things With Words and
further developed by American philosopher J.R. Searle. It considers the degree to which utterances are said to
perform locutionary acts, illocutionary acts, and/or perlocutionary acts.
It is a term to a theory which analyses the role of utterances in relation to the behavior of speaker and listener in
interpersonal communication. It is an act of speech but a communicative activity ( a locutionary act), defined with
reference to the intentions of speakers while speaking ( the illocutionary force for utterances) and the effects they
achieve on listeners (the perlocutionary effect of their utterances).

Context Embedded Language

Context-embedded language refers to communication that occurs in a context of shared
understanding, where there are cues or signals that help to reveal the meaning (e.g. visual clues,
gestures, expressions, specific location). provides several communicative supports to the listener or
reader, such as objects, gestures, or vocal inflections, which help make the information
comprehensible.
Examples of context-embedded communication are a one-to-one social conversation with physical
gestures, or storytelling activities that include visual props.
Context Reduced
Context-reduced language refers to communication where there are few clues about the meaning of
the communication apart from the words themselves. The language is likely to be abstract and
academic. Examples: textbook reading, classroom lecture. Context-reduced communication provides
fewer communicative clues to support understanding. Examples are a phone conversation, which provides no
visual clues, or a note left on a refrigerator.
Language Relativity
The Sapir–Whorf hypothesis, also known as the linguistic relativity hypothesis, refers to the proposal
that the particular language one speaks influences the way one thinks about reality. Linguistic
relativity stands in close relation to semiotic-level concerns with the general relation of language and
thought, and to discourse-level concerns with how patterns of language use in cultural context can
affect thought. Linguistic relativity is distinguished both from simple linguistic diversity and from strict
linguistic determinism.
o The theory of linguistic relativity states that the structure of a language influences the way its speakers
conceptualize the world.
o Language and thought tend to influence one another in a dual, cyclical relationship.