BIBLIOGRAPHY: Widdowson, H.G. (2003) Oxford Introductions to Language Study: Linguistics.

Oxford: OUP.

GUIDE QUESTIONS: The Scope of Linguistics

1- Which are the conceptual differences between Saussure’s distinction (Langue and
Parole) and Chomsky’s distinction (Competence and Performance)?
Ferdinand de Saussure's distinction between Langue and Parole and Noam Chomsky's
distinction between Competence and Performance are both fundamental concepts in
linguistics, but they address different aspects of language.
Saussure's distinction:
 Langue: This refers to the underlying system or structure of a language,
which includes its grammar, vocabulary, and rules. Langue represents
the abstract, idealized aspect of language shared by speakers of a
particular language community.
 Parole: Parole, on the other hand, refers to the actual instances of
speech or language use by individuals. It encompasses the concrete,
observable manifestations of language in everyday communication,
including spoken and written utterances.
Chomsky's distinction:
 Competence: This refers to the speaker-listener's implicit knowledge of
the rules and principles of their language, allowing them to understand
and generate an infinite number of grammatically correct sentences.
Competence represents the speaker's underlying linguistic knowledge,
which may not always be fully conscious or accessible.
 Performance: Performance, on the other hand, refers to the actual use
of language in real-time communication, including speech production
and comprehension. It encompasses the observable instances of
language use, influenced by factors such as memory limitations,
processing constraints, and communicative goals.
In summary, while Saussure's Langue and Parole distinguish between the abstract
system of language and its concrete manifestations, Chomsky's Competence and
Performance distinguish between the speaker's implicit knowledge of language and
their observable use of it in real-world contexts.

2- Identify the issues about:

- The methodology of linguistic enquiry
- The scope of linguistic enquiry
 Methodology of Linguistic Enquiry:
 Empirical vs. Theoretical Approaches: One issue concerns the balance
between empirical and theoretical approaches in linguistic research.
Some linguists advocate for a primarily empirical approach, emphasizing
data collection and analysis to draw conclusions about language. Others
argue for a more theoretical approach, focusing on developing abstract
models and frameworks to explain linguistic phenomena.
 Quantitative vs. Qualitative Methods: There's a debate about the use
of quantitative methods (such as statistical analysis) versus qualitative
methods (such as detailed case studies or introspective analysis) in
linguistic research. Each approach has its strengths and limitations, and
researchers often need to choose the most appropriate method for their
specific research questions.
 Interdisciplinary Collaboration: Linguistic enquiry often intersects with
other fields such as psychology, anthropology, computer science, and
neuroscience. One issue is how to effectively collaborate across
disciplines while maintaining the integrity of linguistic research methods
and theories.
Scope of Linguistic Enquiry:
 Micro vs. Macro Perspectives: Linguistic enquiry can focus on micro-
level phenomena (such as phonetics, syntax, or semantics) or macro-
level phenomena (such as language change, language acquisition, or
language policy). Balancing these perspectives and understanding how
they relate to each other is an ongoing challenge.
 Language Universals vs. Language Variation: Another issue is the
tension between studying language universals (features that are shared
across languages) and language variation (differences between
languages or dialects). Researchers grapple with how to account for
both universals and variation in their analyses.
 Sociocultural Context: Linguistic enquiry often needs to consider the
sociocultural context in which language is used. This includes issues
related to language and identity, language attitudes and ideologies,
multilingualism, and language contact. Understanding how language
functions within diverse sociocultural contexts is essential for
comprehensive linguistic research.
These are just a few of the complex issues that arise in the methodology and scope of
linguistic enquiry. Each issue involves ongoing debate and exploration within the field
of linguistics.
3- State the differences between Chomsky’s view of linguistic knowledge and
Halliday’s view.
Chomsky's view of linguistic knowledge, often referred to as the generative grammar
approach, differs from Halliday's systemic functional linguistics in several key aspects:
Nature of Language:
 Chomsky: Chomsky views language as an innate cognitive capacity,
governed by a universal grammar that is hard-wired into the human
brain. He argues that humans are biologically predisposed to acquire
language, and linguistic competence (knowledge of language) is
separate from linguistic performance (actual language use).
 Halliday: Halliday sees language as a social semiotic system,
emphasizing its functional and communicative aspects. He views
language as a tool for making meaning and interacting with the world,
with a focus on how language is used in context to achieve social goals.
Approach to Grammar:
 Chomsky: Chomsky's approach emphasizes the study of formal
grammar, particularly syntactic structures. He proposes that the
grammar of a language can be described by a set of abstract rules or
principles that generate all and only the grammatical sentences of that
language.
 Halliday: Halliday's approach focuses on systemic functional grammar,
which considers both form and function in language. He emphasizes the
interplay between grammar (structure) and semantics (meaning), as
well as the social functions that language serves in communication.
Language Acquisition:
 Chomsky: Chomsky's theory of language acquisition posits a Language
Acquisition Device (LAD), a hypothetical innate mental structure that
enables children to acquire language rapidly and with little explicit
instruction. According to Chomsky, children discover the rules of their
language through exposure to linguistic input.
 Halliday: Halliday's theory of language acquisition emphasizes the role
of social interaction and communicative experience in language
development. He highlights the importance of children's early
experiences with language in shaping their understanding of grammar
and meaning.
 Focus on Meaning:
 Chomsky: While Chomsky's approach acknowledges the role of meaning
in language, its primary focus is on the formal properties of grammar
and the abstract rules that govern sentence structure.
 Halliday: Halliday's approach places a strong emphasis on meaning,
recognizing that language is inherently meaningful and serves various
social and communicative functions. His theory integrates grammar with
semantics and pragmatics to account for how language is used to convey
meaning in context.
In summary, while both Chomsky and Halliday make significant contributions to the
study of linguistics, they have distinct views on the nature of language, the structure of
grammar, the process of language acquisition, and the role of meaning in linguistic
theory.

4- Define the concept of Communicative competence. Who coined this term initially?
Why would this concept be central to our profession: language teachers?
Communicative competence refers to the ability of an individual to effectively and
appropriately use language in communication within a given social and cultural
context. This concept encompasses not only linguistic competence (knowledge of
grammar and vocabulary) but also pragmatic competence (knowledge of how to use
language in different social situations), sociolinguistic competence (understanding of
social and cultural norms), and strategic competence (ability to compensate for
communication breakdowns).
The term "communicative competence" was initially coined by linguist Dell Hymes in
the 1960s as a response to Noam Chomsky's concept of linguistic competence. Hymes
argued that linguistic competence alone was insufficient to fully understand and
describe language use in real-life situations, as it did not account for the social and
cultural dimensions of communication.
For language teachers, the concept of communicative competence is central because it
shifts the focus of language instruction from mere grammatical accuracy to functional
communication. By emphasizing the ability to use language effectively in real-world
contexts, language teachers can better prepare their students to interact with others in
meaningful ways, both orally and in writing.
Furthermore, understanding communicative competence helps language teachers
design activities and tasks that promote authentic communication, encourage
interaction, and develop learners' ability to negotiate meaning. By integrating the four
components of communicative competence into their teaching practices, language
teachers can foster learners' overall communicative proficiency and prepare them for
successful communication in diverse linguistic and cultural settings.