Second Language Acquisition - Essay Example

Second Language Acquisition by The of the The of the School The and where it is located The Date Second Language Acquisition Introduction If one takes a close look at the human civilization, one can not help noticing that among different features that are considered to be characteristic to this group, there is one that truly defines the nature of a human being. Indeed, the ability to generate verbal interaction can hardly be found anywhere beyond the boundaries of the society that is formed by humans. In other words, it is this ability that truly differs the mankind and may be regarded as a key to understanding the essence of it. That is the reason why scientists from the dawn of humanity paid a considerable amount of attention towards different issues that are connected to language. This means that linguistic studies are extremely important as they investigate the matters are able to contribute to a better understanding of the human civilization. This paper will examine the differences between two notions: communicative competence on the one hand and linguistic competence on the other. Since the key to perceiving the differences between the above mentioned notions partially lies in the process of language acquisition, the paper will utilize three perspectives that were developed with regard to Second Language Acquisition, namely linguistic, psychological and social one in other to make the analysis objective as well as detailed. Each of the above mentioned perspectives will be analyzed in great detail and various frameworks within it will be used, such as Transformational-Generative Grammar and Universal Grammar, Functionalism and Neurolinguistics, Information Processing and Connectionism, individual differences of learners will also be utilized, together with microsocial and macrosial foci of the social perspective. Definitions To begin with, it would be particularly important to provide definitions of each of the concept so that the differences between then might become visible based on some fundamental aspect. Thus, it is suggested that communicative competence might be defined as “what a speaker needs to know to communicate appropriately within a particular language community” (Saville-Troike 2006, p. 100). As one can easily see, there are several key words in this definition. First of all, it includes a certain amount of skills and knowledge that is essential for acquiring communicative competence. Secondly, there is a word that defines the essential element of this notion – “appropriately”. In other words, a person might possess the above mentioned skills and knowledge, but their amount may not be sufficient in order to contribute to emergence of productive interaction. On the other hand, the definition of linguistic competence might be formulated in the following way: “whatever knowledge a speaker-hearer requires to understand or produce a sentence of his language” (Chomsky 1965, 4). As one can clearly see, there are some points that should be closely examined. First of all, it implies the wide array of knowledge and skills that might be required to acquire this competence. In addition to that, this definition puts a tremendous emphasis on two processes of generating and perceiving language codes. Finally, linguistic competence is more concerned with small scale issue, namely the sentences. In other words, this is a more particular concept. Linguistic perspective Internal focus The first framework that will be used in order to highlight the differences between communicative and linguistic competences is often referred to as Transformational-Generative Grammar. Having been developed by Chomsky, it put a great emphasis on the creative aspect of generating language (Chomsky 1978, p. 23). One of the most important ideas that were developed within this framework is the concept of innate capacity. Thus, considering the notion of communicative competence, one might come to a conclusion that it is hard to state for sure that every person has an innate capacity to be communicatively competent. In other words, the success of communication is largely defined by different factors, but genetic predisposition may not be counted as one of them. On the other hand, if one considers the relationship between the above mentioned notion and the idea of linguistic competence, one will see that human beings have an innate capacity of generating language that is conditioned by genetics. For example, over the centuries, the organism of a human being evolved in such a way that we are able to generate peculiar sounds that can hardly be found anywhere in the nature (Radman 2012, p. 150). In spite of the fact, it would not false to think that language should be taken for granted; nevertheless, every child is able to be taught to speak as there is predisposition in one’s body to it. In other words, people have an innate capacity to speak, but it does not lead directly to appropriate usage of it. The next framework that might be extremely useful when it comes to distinguishing between communicative and linguistic competences is the notion of Universal Grammar. Speaking of the implications that this particular approach holds for understanding of the former, one might point out that the meaning of different communicative patters can be easily trace in different language (Goddard 2002, p. 2). In other words, there is some kind of a common ground which can be used by the people in order to apply their knowledge of one language and use it appropriately while speaking a different one. In spite of the fact that languages might utilize various ways to convey the same message, the original idea behind encoding is the key to being an effective speaker in a foreign language. As for the linguistic competence, one might point out that some of the most fundamental notion of a language, namely parts of speech can not be regarded to be the categories that should be taken for granted (Lyons 1991, p. 185). In other words, the division of the world seems to be so natural for a particular person might appear to be quite odd for the people who belong to a different language community. For example, within the Indo-European languages, the category of time is considered to be characteristic to verb. Nevertheless, the Japanese language features a peculiar phenomenon when an adjective is able to have past and present tense. External While the previous framework primarily focused on the internal aspect of language acquisition, it also may be suitable to pay attention to the opposite approach, namely the external one. Thus, communicative competence within this framework will be defined as the one that clearly reflects the major goal of any verbal interaction – the communication between the individuals (Dirven 1987, p. 483). Indeed, this means that a person might be considered to be communicative competent in case on is able to convey a particular message to a different person so that the latter would be able to understand it fully and take appropriate actions. In other words, communicative competence is primarily defined by the success of communication and the ability of one speaker to influence a different speaker with the help of utterances. There is no doubt in the fact that this framework will develop a rather peculiar understanding of linguistic competence. While language is largely defined as a system of symbols, it becomes apparent that there is no place for communication within the understanding of this kind of competence (Tiwari 2010, p. 216). This means that it is possible to be linguistically competent and not communicatively competent: in this case a person will be able to produce language signs in the correct and understandable way, but the very function of them, namely the need to convey a particular message, will be lost, so the utterances will be no more that a mechanical sum of sounds of characters that are generated by such a person. Psychological perspective Languages and the brain There is not doubt that a considerable number of processes that are closely connected to language take place in the mind of a person; so psychological perspective on this issue might be quite insightful. If one draws a connection between communicative competence and the above mentioned concept, one will be able to see that the human body has evolved in such a way that the brain has developed certain ways to organize information in such a manner that can be easily processed in order to be expressed in language (Mody 2008, p. 77). In other words, communicative competence largely relies on the ability of a person to organize the perception of the world in such a way that can be encoded with the help of different signs and conveyed to a different person effectively, without losing any part of the original meaning. In addition to that, the concept of critical period should be taken into account in this case. It is assumed that there is a certain period of time when mind of a human being is able to acquire language and if it is lost, there may not be hope to acquisition in the future (Lenneberg 1967, p. 218). As a result, one might come a conclusion, according to which linguistic competence has a defined period of time; if an individual is not able to develop it, one will never develop communicative competence as well since these two notions is strongly connected. Information Processing The framework that was analyzed previously holds important implication for the development of psychological perspective on the issues in question. Thus, a rather logical continuation of this work was putting emphasis on the phenomenon of information processing in the course of acquiring langue (Takač 2008, p. 36). As a result, the concept of communicative competence might be viewed as a state when a person is able to operate with the given language signs effectively and make sure that other people are able to understand all the peculiarities of meaning that is generated by one. In addition to that, this framework contributes to understanding the above mentioned process as a continuous process where a person is able to gain skills through constant practice. In other words, if one wants to acquire communicative competence, there is no better way than to practice a language. Contrary to that, the researchers found that on a more fundamental level, the ability to process information in a certain way is heavily influenced by the way people perceive the world (Niiranen & Ribeiro 2011, 221). If one develops this idea, one will end up arguing that linguistic competence is primarily based on different preconditioned aspects of the human nature which contributed to the emergence of language universals. As a result, if a person tries to adopt language within the above mentioned critical period, one will be able to learn to reproduce the required signs because this action is perform in the most suitable period for this. Connectionism There is another framework which is based on the psychological perspective, arguing that the process of language acquisition is able to be explained with the help of a detailed analysis of cognitive processes. Thus, as it can be easily understood from the name, connectionism pays a considerable amount of attention towards the connections between words that are based on associations (Ward 1994, p. 51). This might be projected on the issue of communicative competence in the following way: the more a person practices, the better one gets. Indeed, this can be backed up by common knowledge as well: it is generally suggested that people act some dialogues in order to contribute to understanding of language and fluency of speaking. In this case the connection is reinforced by the frequency of repetition. Speaking of linguistic competence, one should point out that this particular framework argues the idea that language signs are connected to the reality and this connection is constantly reinforced through the process of repetition (Regier 1996, p. 33). As a result, each new generation of speakers contributes to the stability of language as a system. That is why linguistic competence might be viewed as a general knowledge of the connections between the signs of a particular language environment. That is why in order to acquire it, it may be sufficient to learn the basic connections which can be achieved through repetition and may be accomplished independently. What is more important is that this might be regarded as one of the most distinct differences between the two concepts. Individual differences When one considers the very process of learning language one can not help noticing that some individuals are able to be more successful on this path, while others can not keep up their pace. As a result, this might be fairly projected to the issue of communicative competence when other people are able to acquire it rather quickly, while others are struggling with it for a considerable amount of time (Arabski 2011, p. 245). There is no doubt that the number of factors that influence each particular learner is tremendous; as a result, it is extremely difficult to make any accurate prediction about the development of communicative competence based on personal performance. Considering the issue of linguistic performance, one might point out that that this notion is also influenced by individual differences, manifestation of which can be traced on every level (Jonassen & Grabowski 1993, p. 6). Thus, a person might find it particularly difficult to master pronunciation of a certain language. For example, some linguistic competences require a person to be able to produce sounds that do not exist in one’s mother tongue which represents one of the biggest obstacles on the way of acquiring it. In other words, in order to achieve communicative competence a person should be able to master the peculiarities of a language on a sufficient level so that the other speaker would be able to understand the entire message that will be encoded. Social perspective Microsocial focus It would not be an exaggeration to point out that the social environment is the platform where language is primarily used. That is why it would be quite important to engage social perspective while examining the differences between communicative and linguistic competences. To begin with, one might point out that the immediate environment of a person is able to have a profound influence on the way a person masters a language (Levy 2007, p. 127). For example, if a person comes from a family of educated people, the possibility that he or she is likely to acquire communicative competence is quite high as one is able to master not only the basics of the language, but also various shades of meaning of it. On the other hand, if one puts too big emphasis on the personal qualities of a person, one will end up developed unnecessarily detailed analysis of one’s linguistic competence. For example, a researcher might be understand in the way older people speak a certain language, but from the perspective of linguistic competence, there will not be much difference from younger speakers (Schneider 2008, p. 18). In other words, the latter concept may be considered to be more universal as it operates with notions that can be viewed through one dimension, namely complying or failing to comply with the sufficient level of acceptance. This means that linguistic competence is not affected as much by the microsocial aspect as the communicative competence. Macrosocial focus Finally, it may be quite advantageous to engage an approach that treat the two above mentioned concepts from a completely different perspective. Thus, the approach with a macrosocial focus would reveal that communicative competence is likely to be acquire by a person who is constantly interacting with a certain group of people. For example, it is a widely known fact that children of the immigrants are able to speak the language of a country where they immigrated fairly well since, unlike their parents, there were able to interact with the respective linguistic environment from the early childhood. In addition to that, acquisition of communicative competence of a new language is largely affected by the environment one spends his or her time in. What is more important is that linguistic competence might be affected by the same factor as well. For example, when a person is able to spend time with the people who speak a different language, over time it is quite natural to be able to produce language signs that a person did not know before. For example, after living some time in China and without any knowledge of language, one will be able to pronounce different tones because of constant practice; as a result, an individual acquired some linguistic competence without any particular efforts. This might serve as an evidence for effectiveness of living in a different country in order to be able to learn a foreign language. In other words, the influence of the social environment on a particular person becomes evident. Conclusion Having examined all the points that were brought up in the paragraphs above, one is able to come to the following conclusion: there is a considerable number of differences between communicative as well as linguistic competence. To begin with, one might point out that the former concept is primarily focused on the effective communication and conveying message to a different person, while the latter puts emphasis on the ability to produce and percept a correct set of language signs. There are three major perspectives that may be engaged while considering the differences between these two notions: the linguistic one, the psychological one and the social one. Each of them is able to provide more detailed levels of investigation. There is no doubt that the relationship between communicative as well as linguistic competence is extremely important for the development of the science as it is able to provide the researchers with the necessary knowledge about the nature of language itself as well as the human cognition. What is more important a clear distinction between the two kinds of competences might enhance the way languages are taught, contributing to development on new techniques that will be more effective than the previous ones. As a result, the knowledge about language that was accumulated by the humans will be enriched and the mankind will shed more light on the mystery of this peculiar phenomenon that largely defines its fundamental aspects and is able to widen the outlook of the human civilization. References Arabski J 2011, Individual learner differences in SLA, Multilingual Matters, Bristol. Ashman K 2000, Human behavior, communities, organizations, and groups in the macro social environment: An empowerment approach. Wadsworth Pub, Sydney. Chomsky N 1965, Aspects of the theory of syntax, M.I.T. Press, Cambridge, MA. Chomsky N 1978, Topics in the theory of generative grammar, Mouton, The Hague. Dirven R 1987, Functionalism in linguistics, John Benjamins Pub., Amsterdam. Goddard C 2002, Meaning and universal grammar theory and empirical findings, John Benjamins Pub., Amsterdam. Jarrett A 2000, The impact of macro social systems on ethnic minorities in the United States, Praeger, Westport, CN. Jonassen D & Grabowski B 1993, Handbook of individual differences, learning, and instruction, L. Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ. Lenneberg E 1967, Biological foundations of language Wiley, New York, NY. Levy E 2007, Gesture and the dynamic dimension of language, John Benjamins Pub., Amsterdam Lyons J 1991, Natural language and universal grammar, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Mody M 2008, Brain, behavior, and learning in language and reading disorders, Guilford Press, New York, NY. Niiranen S & Ribeiro A 2011, Information processing and biological systems, Springer, Berlin. Radman Z. 2012, Knowing without thinking: Mind, action, cognition and the phenomenon of the background, Palgrave Macmillan, Houndmills. Regier T 1996, The human semantic potential spatial language and constrained connectionism, M.I.T. Press, Cambridge, MA. Saville-Troike M 2006, Introducing second language acquisition, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Schneider K 2008, Variational pragmatics a focus on regional varieties in pluricentric languages, John Benjamins Pub., Amsterdam. Takač V 2008, Vocabulary learning strategies and foreign language acquisition, Multilingual Matters, Clevedon. Tiwari S 2010, Teaching of English, A P H Publishing Corporation, New Delhi. Ward N 1994, A connectionist language generator, Ablex Pub, Norwood, NJ. Read More