Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: learning, teaching, assessment

•ability to organise and use materials for self-directed learning;

•ability to learn effectively (both linguistically and socioculturally) from direct observation of and participation in communication events by the cultivation of perceptual, analytical and heuristic skills;

•awareness of one’s own strengths and weaknesses as a learner;

•ability to identify one’s own needs and goals;

•ability to organise one’s own strategies and procedures to pursue these goals, in accordance with one’s own characteristics and resources.

5.1.4.4 Heuristic skills

These include:

•the ability of the learner to come to terms with new experience (new language, new people, new ways of behaving, etc.) and to bring other competences to bear (e.g. by observing, grasping the significance of what is observed, analysing, inferencing, memorising, etc.) in the specific learning situation;

•the ability of the learner (particularly in using target language reference sources) to find, understand and if necessary convey new information;

•the ability to use new technologies (e.g. by searching for information in databases, hypertexts, etc.).

Users of the Framework may wish to consider and where appropriate state:

•what study skills learners are encouraged/enabled to use and develop;

•what heuristic abilities learners are encouraged/enabled to use and develop;

•what provision is made for learners to become increasingly independent in their learning and use of language.

5.2Communicative language competences

For the realisation of communicative intentions, users/learners bring to bear their general capacities as detailed above together with a more specifically language-related communicative competence. Communicative competence in this narrower sense has the following components:

•linguistic competences;

•sociolinguistic competences;

•pragmatic competences.

5.2.1 Linguistic competences

No complete, exhaustive description of any language as a formal system for the expression of meaning has ever been produced. Language systems are of great complexity and

108

The user/learner’s competences

the language of a large, diversified, advanced society is never completely mastered by any of its users. Nor could it be, since every language is in continuous evolution in response to the exigencies of its use in communication. Most nation states have attempted to establish a standard form of the language, though never in exhaustive detail. For its presentation, the model of linguistic description in use for teaching the corpus is still the same model as was employed for the long-dead classical languages. This ‘traditional’ model was, however, repudiated over 100 years ago by most professional linguists, who insisted that languages should be described as they exist in use rather than as some authority thinks they should be and that the traditional model, having been developed for languages of a particular type, was inappropriate for the description of language systems with a very different organisation. However, none of the many proposals for alternative models has gained general acceptance. Indeed, the possibility of one universal model of description for all languages has been denied. Recent work on linguistic universals has not as yet produced results which can be used directly to facilitate language learning, teaching and assessment. Most descriptive linguists are now content to codify practice, relating form and meaning, using terminology which diverges from traditional practice only where it is necessary to deal with phenomena outside the range of traditional models of description. This is the approach adopted in Section 4.2. It attempts to identify and classify the main components of linguistic competence defined as knowledge of, and ability to use, the formal resources from which well-formed, meaningful messages may be assembled and formulated. The scheme that follows aims only to offer as classificatory tools some parameters and categories which may be found useful for the description of linguistic content and as a basis for reflection. Those practitioners who prefer to use a different frame of reference are free, here as elsewhere, to do so. They should then identify the theory, tradition or practice they are following. Here, we distinguish:

5.2.1.1lexical competence;

5.2.1.2grammatical competence;

5.2.1.3semantic competence;

5.2.1.4phonological competence;

5.2.1.5Orthographic competence;

5.2.1.6Orthoepic competence.

Progress in the development of a learner’s ability to use linguistic resources can be scaled and is presented in that form below as appropriate.

109

Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: learning, teaching, assessment

5.2.1.1 Lexical competence, knowledge of, and ability to use, the vocabulary of a language, consists of lexical elements and grammatical elements.

Lexical elements include:

a)Fixed expressions, consisting of several words, which are used and learnt as wholes. Fixed expressions include:

•sentential formulae, including:

direct exponents of language functions (see section 5.2.3.2) such as greetings, e.g.

How do you do? Good morning! etc. proverbs, etc. (see section 5.2.2.3) relict archaisms, e.g. Be off with you!

•phrasal idioms, often:

semantically opaque, frozen metaphors, e.g.: He kicked the bucket (i.e. he died).

It’s a long shot (= unlikely to succeed).

110

The user/learner’s competences

He drove hell for leather (i.e. very fast).

intensifiers. Their use is often contextually and stylistically restricted, e.g. as white as snow (= ‘pure’), as against as white as a sheet (= ‘pallid’).

•fixed frames, learnt and used as unanalysed wholes, into which words or phrases are inserted to form meaningful sentences, e.g.: ‘Please may I have . . .’.

•other fixed phrases, such as:

phrasal verbs, e.g. to put up with, to make do (with); compound prepositions, e.g. in front of.

•fixed collocations, consisting of words regularly used together, e.g. to make a speech/mistake.

b)Single word forms. A particular single word form may have several distinct meanings (polysemy), e.g. tank, a liquid container or an armoured armed vehicle. Single word forms include members of the open word classes: noun, verb, adjective, adverb, though these may include closed lexical sets (e.g. days of the week, months of the year, weights and measures, etc.). Other lexical sets may also be established for grammatical and semantic purposes (see below).

Grammatical elements belong to closed word classes, e.g. (in English):

Illustrative scales are available for the range of vocabulary knowledge, and the ability to control that knowledge.

111

Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: learning, teaching, assessment

VOCABULARY RANGE

C2

Has a good command of a very broad lexical repertoire including idiomatic expressions and colloquialisms; shows awareness of connotative levels of meaning.

Has a good command of a broad lexical repertoire allowing gaps to be readily overcome with

C1 circumlocutions; little obvious searching for expressions or avoidance strategies. Good command of idiomatic expressions and colloquialisms.

B2

Has a good range of vocabulary for matters connected to his/her field and most general topics. Can vary formulation to avoid frequent repetition, but lexical gaps can still cause hesitation and circumlocution.

B1

Has a sufficient vocabulary to express him/herself with some circumlocutions on most topics pertinent to his/her everyday life such as family, hobbies and interests, work, travel, and current events.

Has sufficient vocabulary to conduct routine, everyday transactions involving familiar situations and

topics.

A2

Has a sufficient vocabulary for the expression of basic communicative needs. Has a sufficient vocabulary for coping with simple survival needs.

A1

Has a basic vocabulary repertoire of isolated words and phrases related to particular concrete situations.

VOCABULARY CONTROL

C2 Consistently correct and appropriate use of vocabulary.

C1 Occasional minor slips, but no significant vocabulary errors.

B2

Lexical accuracy is generally high, though some confusion and incorrect word choice does occur without hindering communication.

B1

Shows good control of elementary vocabulary but major errors still occur when expressing more complex thoughts or handling unfamiliar topics and situations.

A2 Can control a narrow repertoire dealing with concrete everyday needs.

Users of the Framework may wish to consider and where appropriate state:

•which lexical elements (fixed expressions and single word forms) the learner will need/be equipped/be required to recognise and/or use;

•how they are selected and ordered.

5.2.1.2Grammatical competence

Grammatical competence may be defined as knowledge of, and ability to use, the grammatical resources of a language.

Formally, the grammar of a language may be seen as the set of principles governing

112

The user/learner’s competences

the assembly of elements into meaningful labelled and bracketed strings (sentences). Grammatical competence is the ability to understand and express meaning by producing and recognising well-formed phrases and sentences in accordance with these principles (as opposed to memorising and reproducing them as fixed formulae). The grammar of any language in this sense is highly complex and so far defies definitive or exhaustive treatment. There are a number of competing theories and models for the organisation of words into sentences. It is not the function of the Framework to judge between them or to advocate the use of any one, but rather to encourage users to state which they have chosen to follow and what consequences their choice has for their practice. Here we limit ourselves to identifying some parameters and categories which have been widely used in grammatical description.

The description of grammatical organisation involves the specification of:

•elements, e.g.: morphs

morphemes-roots and affixes words

•categories, e.g.: number, case, gender

concrete/abstract, countable/uncountable (in)transitive, active/passive voice past/present/future tense

progressive, (im)perfect aspect

•classes, e.g.: conjugations

declensions

open word classes: nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs, closed word classes (grammatical elements – see section 5.2.1.1)

•structures, e.g.: compound and complex words

phrases: (noun phrase, verb phrase, etc.) clauses: (main, subordinate, co-ordinate) sentences: (simple, compound, complex)

•processes (descriptive), e.g.:

nominalisation affixation suppletion gradation transposition transformation

•relations, e.g.: government

concord valency

An illustrative scale is available for grammatical accuracy. This scale should be seen in relation to the scale for general linguistic range shown at the beginning of this section. It is not considered possible to produce a scale for progression in respect of grammatical structure which would be applicable across all languages.

113

Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: learning, teaching, assessment

GRAMMATICAL ACCURACY

C2 Maintains consistent grammatical control of complex language, even while attention is otherwise engaged (e.g. in forward planning, in monitoring others’ reactions).

C1 Consistently maintains a high degree of grammatical accuracy; errors are rare and difficult to spot.

Good grammatical control; occasional ‘slips’ or non-systematic errors and minor flaws in sentence structure may still occur, but they are rare and can often be corrected in retrospect.

B2

Shows a relatively high degree of grammatical control. Does not make mistakes which lead to misunderstanding.

Communicates with reasonable accuracy in familiar contexts; generally good control though with

noticeable mother tongue influence. Errors occur, but it is clear what he/she is trying to express.

B1

Uses reasonably accurately a repertoire of frequently used ‘routines’ and patterns associated with more predictable situations.

A2

Uses some simple structures correctly, but still systematically makes basic mistakes – for example tends to mix up tenses and forget to mark agreement; nevertheless, it is usually clear what he/she is trying to say.

A1

Shows only limited control of a few simple grammatical structures and sentence patterns in a learnt repertoire.

Users of the Framework may wish to consider and where appropriate state:

•on which theory of grammar they have based their work;

•which grammatical elements, categories, classes, structures, processes and relations are learners, etc. equipped/required to handle.

A distinction is traditionally drawn between morphology and syntax.

Morphology deals with the internal organisation of words. Words may be analysed into morphemes, classed as:

•roots, or stems;

•affixes (prefixes, suffixes, infixes), including: word-forming affixes (e.g. re-, un-, -ly, -ness); inflexional affixes (e.g. s, -ed, -ing).

Word-formation:

Words may be classified into:

•simple words (root only, e.g. six, tree, break);

•complex words (root + affixes, e.g. unbrokenly, sixes);

•compound words (containing more than one root, e.g. sixpence, breakdown, oak-tree, evening dress).

114

The user/learner’s competences

Morphology also deals with other ways of modifying word forms, e.g.:

Morphophonology deals with the phonetically conditioned variation of morphemes (e.g. English s/z/iz in walks, lies, rises; t/d/id in laughed, cried, shouted), and their morphologically conditioned phonetic variation (e.g. i:/e in creep/crept, mean/meant, weep/ wept).

Users of the Framework may wish to consider and where appropriate state:

•what morphological elements and processes the learner will need/be equipped/required to handle.

Syntax deals with the organisation of words into sentences in terms of the categories, elements, classes, structures, processes and relations involved, often presented in the form of a set of rules. The syntax of the language of a mature native speaker is highly complex and largely unconscious. The ability to organise sentences to convey meaning is a central aspect of communicative competence.

Users of the Framework may wish to consider and where appropriate state:

•what grammatical elements, categories, classes, structures, processes and relations learners will need/be equipped/required to handle.

5.2.1.3Semantic competence

deals with the learner’s awareness and control of the organisation of meaning. Lexical semantics deals with questions of word meaning, e.g.:

•relation of word to general context: reference;

connotation;

exponence of general specific notions;

•interlexical relations, such as: synonymy/antonymy; hyponymy;

collocation; part-whole relations; componential analysis;

translation equivalence.

115

Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: learning, teaching, assessment

Grammatical semantics deals with the meaning of grammatical elements, categories, structures and processes (see section 5.2.1.2).

Pragmatic semantics deals with logical relations such as entailment, presupposition, implicature, etc.

Users of the Framework may wish to consider and where appropriate state:

•what kinds of semantic relation learners are equipped/required to build up/demonstrate.

Questions of meaning are of course central to communication and are treated passim in this Framework (see particularly section 5.1.1.1).

Linguistic competence is treated here in a formal sense. From the point of view of theoretical or descriptive linguistics, a language is a highly complex symbolic system. When an attempt is made, as here, to separate out the many different components of communicative competence, knowledge (largely unconscious) of and ability to handle formal structure is legitimately identifiable as one of those components. How much, if indeed any, of this formal analysis should enter into language learning or teaching is a different matter. The functional/notional approach adopted in the Council of Europe publications

Waystage 1990, Threshold Level 1990 and Vantage Level offers an alternative to the treatment of linguistic competence in Section 5.2.1–3. Instead of starting from language forms and their meanings, it starts from a systematic classification of communicative functions and of notions, divided into general and specific, and secondarily deals with forms, lexical and grammatical, as their exponents. The approaches are complementary ways of dealing with the ‘double articulation’ of language. Languages are based on an organisation of form and an organisation of meaning. The two kinds of organisation cut across each other in a largely arbitrary fashion. A description based on the organisation of the forms of expression atomises meaning, and that based on the organisation of meaning atomises form. Which is to be preferred by the user will depend on the purpose for which the description is produced. The success of the Threshold Level approach indicates that many practitioners find it more advantageous to go from meaning to form rather than the more traditional practice of organising progression in purely formal terms. On the other hand, some may prefer to use a ‘communicative grammar’, as for example, in Un niveau-seuil. What is clear is that a language learner has to acquire both forms and meanings.

5.2.1.4Phonological competence

involves a knowledge of, and skill in the perception and production of:

•the sound-units (phonemes) of the language and their realisation in particular contexts (allophones);

•the phonetic features which distinguish phonemes (distinctive features, e.g. voicing, rounding, nasality, plosion);

•the phonetic composition of words (syllable structure, the sequence of phonemes, word stress, word tones);

•sentence phonetics (prosody)

•sentence stress and rhythm

•intonation;

116

The user/learner’s competences

•phonetic reduction

•vowel reduction

•strong and weak forms

•assimilation

•elision.

Users of the Framework may wish to consider and where appropriate state:

•what new phonological skills are required of the learner;

•what is the relative importance of sounds and prosody;

•whether phonetic accuracy and fluency are an early learning objective or developed as a longer term objective.

5.2.1.5Orthographic competence

involves a knowledge of and skill in the perception and production of the symbols of which written texts are composed. The writing systems of all European languages are based on the alphabetic principle, though those of some other languages follow an ideographic (logographic) principle (e.g. Chinese) or a consonantal principle (e.g. Arabic). For alphabetic systems, learners should know and be able to perceive and produce:

•the form of letters in printed and cursive forms in both upper and lower case

•the proper spelling of words, including recognised contracted forms

•punctuation marks and their conventions of use

•typographical conventions and varieties of font, etc.

•logographic signs in common use (e.g. @, &, $, etc.)

5.2.1.6Orthoepic competence

Conversely, users required to read aloud a prepared text, or to use in speech words first encountered in their written form, need to be able to produce a correct pronunciation from the written form. This may involve:

117