A Case for Teaching Communicative Functions of Certain Grammatical Categories
A Case for Teaching Communicative Functions of Certain Grammatical Categories
Gaurav Deep, lecturer Dept. of English, Sobhasaria Engineering College, Sikar
Introduction:
Grammar can be narrowly defined to include only morphology and syntax. Structural linguists held this view of grammar. Grammar can be widely defined so as to include phonology, morphology, syntax and semantics. Grammar then under such a view will be concerned with the principles and processes of sentence construction. Transformational Grammarians held such a view of grammar. Grammar can be still more widely defined so as to include phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics and rules of communicative competence is defined as the study of context in the interpretation of utterances. Dell Hymes, widdowson, Keith Brown, Wilkins etc. hold such a view of grammar.
Then, our concept of what is grammatical is dependent upon our view of grammar. Linguists who include only morphology and syntax under grammar will regard syntactically well formed sentences as grammatical. So as sentence like ‘The tree married the girl’ will be grammatically well formed for them.
However, in Chomskyian type of grammar, the sentence would be considered semantically deviant and hence will be out.
In yet wider view of grammar, not only syntactic and semantic deviance but also communicative deviance will matter. By communicative deviance is meant the utterances that are not appropriate. The following utterance will be out because they are formally inappropriate:
1) a. What happened to the books?
b. The moths destroyed them (formally inappropriate)
The functionally inappropriate utterances will also be out:
2) a. What’s this? (In a context where the listener and speaker both know the object.)
b. It’s a book.
The utterance could be stylistically inappropriate:
3) Extinguish the fags, chaps.
Depending upon the purposes for which a grammar is written, a grammar can be classified into a
Gaurav Deep, lecturer Dept. of English, Sobhasaria Engineering College, Sikar
Introduction:
Grammar can be narrowly defined to include only morphology and syntax. Structural linguists held this view of grammar. Grammar can be widely defined so as to include phonology, morphology, syntax and semantics. Grammar then under such a view will be concerned with the principles and processes of sentence construction. Transformational Grammarians held such a view of grammar. Grammar can be still more widely defined so as to include phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics and rules of communicative competence is defined as the study of context in the interpretation of utterances. Dell Hymes, widdowson, Keith Brown, Wilkins etc. hold such a view of grammar.
Then, our concept of what is grammatical is dependent upon our view of grammar. Linguists who include only morphology and syntax under grammar will regard syntactically well formed sentences as grammatical. So as sentence like ‘The tree married the girl’ will be grammatically well formed for them.
However, in Chomskyian type of grammar, the sentence would be considered semantically deviant and hence will be out.
In yet wider view of grammar, not only syntactic and semantic deviance but also communicative deviance will matter. By communicative deviance is meant the utterances that are not appropriate. The following utterance will be out because they are formally inappropriate:
1) a. What happened to the books?
b. The moths destroyed them (formally inappropriate)
The functionally inappropriate utterances will also be out:
2) a. What’s this? (In a context where the listener and speaker both know the object.)
b. It’s a book.
The utterance could be stylistically inappropriate:
3) Extinguish the fags, chaps.
Depending upon the purposes for which a grammar is written, a grammar can be classified into a
References: Austin, J.L. 1962. How to Do Things with words. New York: Academic press. Leech, Geoffrey and Jan Gvartivik. 1975. A communicative Grammar of English. London: Longman. Quirk, Randolph, et al. 1984. A Comprehensive Grammar of English. London: Longman. Quirk, Randolph and Sidney Green baum 1973. A Concise Grammar of Contemporary English New York: Harcourt Brace Inc. Thomson, A.J. and A.V. Martinet. 1986. A Practical English Grammar. Delhi: OUP Widdowson, Henry. 1972. Teaching English as Communication London: OUP Wood, F.T. 1968. A Remedial Grammar for Foreign Students London: Macmillan.