Communicative competence in teaching speaking

participants):
Understanding how to take into account who is
speaking to whom, in what circumstances, about
what, and for what reason.
However, the success of teaching speaking is
absolutely emphasized to the use, not the usage. It can be
separated 
with 
CLT 
(communicative 
Language
Teaching). As known that the target of CLT achieves
communicative competence as the final result of learning
language, especially in speaking which the students will
speak naturally based on the context.
Based on the writer’s observation and teaching
experience, the failure of achieving the target
experienced by the students in speaking is because most

---

of the speaking teachers focus on the usage more than
the use as suggested in CLT. Understanding CLT
method will emerge awareness of the speaking teacher to
connect their teaching method, strategy and technique to
communicative competence.
This paper tries to inform the readers the concept of
communicative 
competence, 
the
importance 
of
developing communicative competence in teaching
speaking, and the connection between CLT and
communicative competence.
DISCUSSION
THE 
CONCEPTS 
OF 
COMMUNICATIVE
COMPETENCE
Communicative competence is a term in linguistics,
not only refers to a language user's grammatical
knowledge but also social knowledge about how and
when to use utterances appropriately. The ability to use
the language correctly and appropriately according to
communicative 
competence
is
to 
accomplish
communication goals. The desired outcome of the use of
the language is the ability to communicate competently,
not the ability to use it exactly as a native speaker does.
It means that the communicators of the language would
communicate naturally without the strict tie of native
speaker’s influence. This condition really mirrors the
existence of communicative competence as the achieved

---

target of learning language. The teachers of language, of
course, lead their students based on what is suggested by
the communicative competence that involve some areas:
linguistics competence, Sociolinguistics competence,
Discourse competence, and Strategic competence.
According to Canale and Swain (1980: 47)
Communicative competence is made up of four
competence areas: linguistic, sociolinguistic, discourse,
and strategic.

Linguistic competence is knowing how to use the
grammar, syntax, and vocabulary of a language.
Linguistic competence asks: What words do I
use? How do I put them into phrases and
sentences?

Sociolinguistic competence is knowing how to
use and respond to language appropriately, given
the setting, the topic, and the relationships among
the 
people 
communicating. 
Sociolinguistic
competence asks: Which words and phrases fit
this setting and this topic? How can I express a
specific attitude (courtesy, authority, friendliness,
respect) when I need to? How do I know what
attitude another person is expressing?

Discourse competence
is knowing how to
interpret the larger context and how to construct
longer stretches of language so that the parts
make 
up 
a 
coherent 
whole. 
Discourse
competence asks: How are words, phrases and
sentences put together to create conversations,
speeches, email messages, newspaper articles?

---


Strategic competence
is knowing how to
recognize and repair communication breakdowns,
how to work around gaps in one’s knowledge of
the language, and how to learn more about the
language 
and 
in 
the 
context. 
Strategic
competence asks: How do I know when I’ve
misunderstood 
or 
when 
someone 
has
misunderstood me? What do I say then? How can
I express my ideas if I don’t know the name of
something or the right verb form to use?
Meanwhile, Savignon (1983: 49) cites through the
influence of communicative language teaching, it has
become 
widely 
accepted 
that 
communicative
competence should be the goal of language education
central to good classroom practice. This is in contrast to
previous views in which grammatical competence was
commonly given top priority. The understanding of
communicative competence has been influenced by the
field of pragmatics and the philosophy of language
concerning speech act. In addition, Savignon describes
the importance of characteristics of communicative
competence and states that communicative competence
is dynamic, relative, context specific, and applies to both
written and spoken language, as well as to many other
symbolic systems. This idea is also supported by Zainil
(2003: 35) that itemizes
the characteristics of
communicative competence as follows:
1. The dynamic, interpersonal nature of communicative
competence and its dependence on the negotiation of

---

meaning between two or more persons who share to
some degree the same symbolic system
2. Its application to both spoken and written language as
well as to many other symbolic systems
3. The role of context in determining a specific
communicative competence, the infinite variety of
situations in which communication takes place, and the
dependence of success in a particular role on one's
understanding of the context and on prior experience of a
similar kind
4. Communicative competence as a relative, not
absolute, concept, one dependent on the cooperation of
all participants, a situation which makes it reasonable to
speak of degrees of communicative competence.
Mean 
while, 
Hymes 
( 
1972: 
114)
clarifies
communicative competence is a concept introduced and
discussed and redefined by many authors. Original idea
is that speakers of a language have to have more than
grammatical competence in order to be able to
communicate effectively in a language; they also need to
know how language is used by members of a speech
community to accomplish their purposes. Furthermore,
Hymes classifies communicative competence into two
groups that each has four aspects:

---