Communicative language teaching: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 21:49, 8 March 2024

Revision as of 06:33, 9 March 2024

Line 21:

Later in the 1970s British linguist [[M.A.K. Halliday]] studied how language functions are expressed through grammar.<ref name=":8">Littlewood, William. ''Communicative language teaching: An introduction''. Cambridge University Press, 1981, pp. 541–545</ref>

The development of communicative language teaching was bolstered by these academic ideas. Before the growth of communicative language teaching, the primary method of language teaching was [[situationalLanguage languagepedagogy#The teaching]]{{clarify|date=Marchoral 2024}}<!--Thereapproach doesn'tand seemsituational tolanguage be an article about Situationalteaching|situational language teaching. And wasn't the primary method the grammar-translation method?-->]], a method that was much more clinical in nature and relied less on direct communication. In Britain, applied linguists began to doubt the efficacy of situational language teaching, partly in response to Chomsky's insights into the nature of language. Chomsky had shown that the structural theories of language then prevalent could not explain the variety that is found in real communication.<ref name=":10">{{Cite book|title=Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching|last1=Richards|first1=Jack|last2=Rodgers|first2=Theodore|publisher=Cambridge University Press|year=2014|isbn=978-1-107-67596-4|___location=Cambridge|pages=23–24, 84–85|edition=3nd}}</ref> In addition, applied linguists like Christopher Candlin and [[Henry Widdowson]] observed that the current model of language learning was ineffective in classrooms. They saw a need for students to develop communicative skill and functional competence in addition to mastering language structures.<ref name=":10" />

In 1966, the linguist and anthropologist [[Dell Hymes]] developed the concept of [[communicative competence]], which redefined what it meant to "know" a language. In addition to speakers having mastery over the structural elements of language, they must also be able to use those structural elements appropriately in a variety of speech domains.<ref name=":9" /> That can be neatly summed up by Hymes's statement: "There are rules of use without which the rules of grammar would be useless."<ref name=":0" /> The idea of communicative competence stemmed from Chomsky's concept of the [[linguistic competence]] of an ideal native speaker.<ref name=":9" /> Hymes did not make a concrete formulation of communicative competence, but subsequent authors, notably Michael Canale, have tied the concept to language teaching.<ref name=":11">{{cite journal |doi=10.1093/applin/I.1.1 |title=Theoretical Bases of Communicative Approaches to Second Language Teaching and Testing |year=1980 |last1=Canale |first1=M. |last2=Swain |first2=M. |journal=Applied Linguistics |pages=1–47 }}</ref> Canale and Swain (1980) defined communicative competence in terms of three components: grammatical competence, [[sociolinguistic]] competence, and strategic competence. Canale (1983) refined the model by adding discourse competence, which contains the concepts of [[cohesion (linguistics)|cohesion]] and [[coherence (linguistics)|coherence]].<ref name=":11" />