The concept of proficiency as far as language is concerned has remained a relative term in lingui... more The concept of proficiency as far as language is concerned has remained a relative term in linguistic parlance. In absolute sense of it, proficiency represents an " unknowable abstraction that reflects the universal competence of native speakers " ; a perception that has great consequences for the second language learners. This led to the emphasis placed on communicative competence and learner variability from the early 1970s. Learners vary in their linguistic competence. They are also prone to both interlingua and intralingua errors, with many having difficulty in expressing their communicative intentions. This paper is therefore one attempt aimed at providing insight into the learners' structural and grammatical problems as well as communication strategies they employ in awareness of the gaps in their linguistic repertoire. Introduction The definition of proficiency as far as language is concerned has consequences for second language learners. For second language learners, attaining native – speaker proficiency is almost a state of utopia. According to Bialystok (1998) a proper definition of language proficiency should present an identifiable standard against which to describe language skills of users in different contexts. This requires a combination of formal structure, that is, a clear set of standards and communicative application, which include recognition of variation from the rules. In actual sense, second language learners vary in the ultimate level of proficiency with many failing to achieve target language competence. The variability has been linked to the fact that learners are less familiar and confident with the structural elements and conventions of the target language. The variable performance is often characterized by both interlingual and intralingual errors that emerge as learners develop interlanguage development. Moreover, as a result of the gaps in learners' linguistic repertoire, they often have difficulty in expressing their communicative intentions. This, most of the times, makes them adopt some communication strategies in an attempt to pass across their meaning. This apparent structural and grammatical inadequacy in learners' repertoire presents great challenges not only to the learners but also to teachers and researchers.
The concept of proficiency as far as language is concerned has remained a relative term in lingui... more The concept of proficiency as far as language is concerned has remained a relative term in linguistic parlance. In absolute sense of it, proficiency represents an " unknowable abstraction that reflects the universal competence of native speakers " ; a perception that has great consequences for the second language learners. This led to the emphasis placed on communicative competence and learner variability from the early 1970s. Learners vary in their linguistic competence. They are also prone to both interlingua and intralingua errors, with many having difficulty in expressing their communicative intentions. This paper is therefore one attempt aimed at providing insight into the learners' structural and grammatical problems as well as communication strategies they employ in awareness of the gaps in their linguistic repertoire. Introduction The definition of proficiency as far as language is concerned has consequences for second language learners. For second language learners, attaining native – speaker proficiency is almost a state of utopia. According to Bialystok (1998) a proper definition of language proficiency should present an identifiable standard against which to describe language skills of users in different contexts. This requires a combination of formal structure, that is, a clear set of standards and communicative application, which include recognition of variation from the rules. In actual sense, second language learners vary in the ultimate level of proficiency with many failing to achieve target language competence. The variability has been linked to the fact that learners are less familiar and confident with the structural elements and conventions of the target language. The variable performance is often characterized by both interlingual and intralingual errors that emerge as learners develop interlanguage development. Moreover, as a result of the gaps in learners' linguistic repertoire, they often have difficulty in expressing their communicative intentions. This, most of the times, makes them adopt some communication strategies in an attempt to pass across their meaning. This apparent structural and grammatical inadequacy in learners' repertoire presents great challenges not only to the learners but also to teachers and researchers.
Uploads
Papers by mae alo