Introduction
This paper intends to reflect upon issues of SLA theories discussed in a debate on topics like negotiation of meaning, communicative competence, and learning or acquisition of a foreign or second language.
During the debate, this comic strip by Quino was analyzed, which depicted a foreigner who arrived in a new country and was exposed to an unknown language and culture. While he walked through different places, he heard an utterance from local people that he thought (from their body language) meant 'hello' or ‘welcome’ and, unable to speak the language, he replied by raising his hat. When he reached the hotel, he heard the same utterance in a different context, in which another man clearly expressed negative feelings. Then he was dumbfounded wondering whether he had misunderstood the previous times he heard people talking to him.
What is the connection between the story, negotiation of meanings and communicative competence?
The strip distinguished a tourist’s desire to negotiate meaning to understand what the utterance stood for. In these cases, there needs to be willingness from both sides to engage in communication. The biggest obstacle is the lack of components comprised in communicative competence, i.e., grammaticaDuring the debate, a comic strip by Quino was analyzed, which depicted a foreigner who arrived in a new country and was exposed to an unknown language and culture. While he walked through different places, he heard an utterance from local people that he thought (from their body language) meant 'hello' or ‘welcome’ and, unable to speak the language, he replied by raising his hat. When he reached the hotel, he heard the same utterance in a different context, in which another man clearly expressed negative feelings. Then he was dumbfounded wondering whether he had misunderstood the previous times he heard people talking to him.
l, sociolinguistic and strategic competences (Canale and Swain, 1980). According to Stephen Krashen's Input Hypothesis, the input should be beyond the current level, that is, i+1, for it to be comprehensible. By considering his experiences related to the language, knowledge, gestures, emotions and body language he may have a schema to understand the utterance. Furthermore, silence in the beginning of SLA is a result of internalized comprehensive input. (Krashen, 1985). In consequence, acculturation should also be considered, since it is the process of adapting to a new culture (Schumann,1978). It may be possible to argue that in divergent cultures the linguistic sign used by locals can consist of one signifier (the utterance itself) but more than one interpretation (Saussure's theory ([1916]1983).
The context in the last scene illustrates Vygotsky’s contributions regarding social constructivism (1962), as the learner has an ongoing movement towards a higher intellectual level in what he called “zone of proximal development”. Reaching optimal potential is merely an aftermath of social interaction. Hence, to reach the utmost intake it needs to be complemented with clarification, confirmation and checking of the input (Ellis. 1985:127).
Recognizing the importance of negotiation of meanings in SLA, does it always help in an EFL context? Why? Why not? Remember there are, at least, two points of views on this respect -re-read our lesson plan- Is it possible to reconcile these two ideas?
Negotiation of Meaning (the repeating, rephrasing, and restructuring of phrases between learners) is essential for SLA, as long as it provides students with comprehensible input, (Long 1985, 1996) opportunities for modification of output, and manipulation of L2. It is considered necessary for the acquisition of the target language because this interaction generally develops interlanguage (Krashen: 1982). In order to enhance communicative competence, EFL contexts should provide learners with maximum exposure to the TL since these places are the only communicative contexts in which language is both the means and the end of communication. Although studies by Foster (1997), analyzing cognitive and sociocultural perspectives on negotiation of meaning, have discredited its helpfulness, in academic settings, new ideas, theories, diversity, culture, classroom environment, and tasks should be considered.
Is it necessary to be an effective communicator or a competent one, these days? Bear the comic strip in mind.
It is necessary to be an effective communicator instead of a competent one. According to Canale and Swain (1980) and Lane (2000), Competent Communication is the degree to which an interlocutor’s goals are achieved, through effective and appropriate interaction, i.e., to handle grammatical, sociolinguistic, discourse and strategic competences. Nonetheless, according to Robinson, Segal & Segal (2013), Effective Communication implies not only exchanging information, but understanding the emotion behind the input, which happens in a spontaneous, non-formulaic way. Probably the first native conversationalists in the comic were competent communicators, and used language appropriately for their purposes, but the visitor did not understand the nuances, so the exchanges were not efficient. The hotel clerk seemed to convey those emotions more clearly through body language and intonation. Based on those clues, the visitor modified his hypothesis about the utterance, but he was not able to communicate effectively. This confusing situation may be followed by negotiation of meaning for communication to succeed. Even though it is paramount to develop competences to interact with speakers of other languages, in this globalized world, it is necessary to be an effective communicator, achieving successful NfM and guaranteeing comprehension from both parts.
