This document discusses different views on the concept of communicative competence proposed by Ferdinand de Saussure, Noam Chomsky, and Dell Hymes. De Saussure viewed language as a social norm and speaking acts as individual manifestations of that norm. Chomsky defined linguistic competence as the language someone knows and performance as speech acts. Hymes proposed communicative competence as the ability to use language appropriately based on what is grammatically possible, feasible, and appropriate for the context. The views represent a sociological, rationalistic, and pragmatic distinction respectively. Later work by Canale and Swain expanded on Hymes' theory to include grammatical, sociolinguistic, and strategic competences.

1. Different Views on the Concept of Communicative Competence
Ferdinand D`Saussure Noam Chomsky Dell Hymes
Langue Parole Linguistic
Competence
Performance Communicative
Competence
Language as a
social norm.
Acts of speaking
(individual
manifestations of
that norm).
The language that
a person knows.
Speech acts that a
language user
performs.
The ability to
Answer:
If something is:
1.Grammatically
possible
2.Feasible
3.Appropriate to
the context
4.In fact done
Sociological distintion Racionalistic distintion Pragmatic view
Critics:
De Saussure saw as the sole object of
linguistics science that aspect of the
language which corresponds to a social fact.
While this idea may seem to be an
abstraction from the physical point of view
language (La langue) is not and cannot be a
physical fact.
Critics:
1. The problem is that he relies upon
people's intuitions as to what is right or
wrong - but it is not at all clear that people
will all make the same judgements, or that
their judgements actually reflect the way
people really do use the language.
2. It does not include a social aspect of
language.
3. Chomsky also appears to reduce language
to its grammar. He seems to regard meaning
as secondary - a sentence such as 'Colourless
green ideas sleep furiously' may be
considered as part of the English language,
for it is grammatically correct, and therefore
worthy of study by Transformational
Grammarians.
Critics:
There is not an acceptable critic now to
the concept of CC; however, it is
importsnt to say, the theory has been
enriched by canale and Swaim (1980).
They describe the communicative
behaviour in terms of three interrelated
dimensions: grammatical, sociolinguistic
and stategic competences.
Gathered by:Cristina Chirino (2012)