Unit 5

ORAL COMMUNICATION. ELEMENTS AND RULES.

ROUTINES AND FORMULAIC LANGUAGE.
ORAL COMMUNICATION STRATEGIES
0. INTRODUCTION
1. ORAL COMMUNICATION
1. 1. SPOKEN vs WRITTEN COMMUNICATION
1.1. 1. Supremacy of speech
1.1.2. Writing and speech on the same level
1.1.3. Supremacy of writing
2. ELEMENTS AND RULES GOVERNING ORAL DISCOURSE
2.1. Elements governing oral discourse.
2.1.1. Linguistic elements.
2.1.2. Non-linguistic elements.
2.2. Rules governing oral discourse.
2.2.1. Rules of usage.
2.2.2. Rules of use.
2.2.3. Conversational Studies.
3. ROUTINES AND FORMULAIC SPEECH
4. STRATEGIES IN ORAL COMMUNICATION
5. BIBLIOGRAPHY
 1
0. INTRODUCTION
The aim of this unit is to frame the concept of oral communication as a unique and distinctive element
within human communication. In order to do this, we will firstly analyse the nature of human
communication and the use of language as a distinctive tool for human interaction. Then we will
analyse the specific features of the speech as opposed to writing. Next we will consider the different
elements of the oral communication. Finally, the importance of routines and formulaic language will
be analysed as well as the importance of strategic competence for the effectiveness of communication
as a whole.

1. ORAL COMMUNICATION
Semiotics is the study of different symbols and signs as means of communication. It is essential to
look into oral communication within the wider perspective of the different signs, symbols and modes
of communication human beings use. Although oral communication is primary and distinctive to all
human beings, especially in the use of the verbal code and its realization in speech and writing, we
must be aware that there are other means whereby human beings communicate.
We shall therefore attempt to undercome the study of oral communication bearing in mind that
communication among human beings is mainly realized by means of the verbal code (Language)
through oral auditory signs. The use of oral auditory channel is primary in human beings although
there are other channels or modes of communication such as the visual (writing). Nevertheless, this
use of language through the oral tract (speech) as we shall see, will be aided by other modes or
channels mainly through the use of the so called non-verbal communication (body language).
Oral communication can therefore be defined as a two-way process in which both speaker and hearer
must be present in the same situational context, unless we talk about special cases of oral
communication such as telephone conversations. We are therefore talking about an interactive
situation directly related and dependent on the communicative function and the speech situation
involving speaker and hearer.
In a communicative event both speaker and hearer perform highly complex processes. They must
encode and decode messages under time pressure always bearing in mind their purposes for
interaction. The oral message unlike the written language where the sentences are carefully structured
and linked together, is often characterized by incomplete and sometimes ungrammatical utterances,
and by frequent repetitions and overlapping.
The apparently chaotic oral message would be difficult to interpret as M. Geddes (Johnson, K et al
1981:70) points out, without the help of the prosodic features such as stress, rhythm, intonation,
pitch, etc., which as we shall see are essential aspects of oral communication.
 2
1. 1. SPOKEN vs. WRITTEN COMMUNICATION
Now let's study the main differences between writing and speech. The most obvious is the contrast in
physical form. Speech uses phonic substance typically in the form of air-pressure movements,
whereas writing uses graphic substance, typically in the form of marks on a surface. As writing can
only occasionally be thought of as an interaction, we can establish the following points of contrast:
1) The permanence of writing allows repeated reading and close analysis. The spontaneity and
rapidity of speech minimizes the chance of complex pre-planning, and promotes features that assist
speakers to think standing up.
2) The participants in written interaction cannot usually see each other, so they cannot make clear
what they mean. However, in speech interactions feedback is possible.
3) The majority of graphic features presents a system of contrasts that has no speech equivalent. Many
genres of written language, such as tables, graphs and complex formulae, cannot be conveyed by
reading aloud.
4) Some contractions may only be found in writing, others only occur in speech, such as in slang and
swear words.
5) Finally we can say that writing tends to be more formal and so it is more likely to provide the
standard that society values. Its performance provides it with a special status.
1.1. 1. Supremacy of speech
Speech was traditionally the original object of Linguistics, while writing was only considered a means
of representing the primary form, based on sounds which were the first manifestation of human
communication. This consideration derives mainly from the studies of Ferdinand de Saussure, who
did not consider writing worthy of synchronic study, because it had not independent life, its only
function was to represent the system of sounds which form a language.
Saussure distinguishes three different kinds of linguistic objects: the language system (La langue),
speech (la parole) and writing. The real object of study for him was the abstract system of signs
which find their expression in the actual examples of speech used by people (la parole). But neither
speech nor writing can be the object of linguistic study because speech is transient, unpredictable and
completely context dependant, while writing is not really part of the language, but a means of making
manifest the sound system.
On the same line as Saussure is Leonard Bloomfield, who regarded writing simply as a means of
recording language like a 'phonograph' or a 'radio'. His arguments for the primacy of speech are that
it precedes writing chronologically in both the history of people and a person.
Noam Chomsky, considers writing more in the context of memory processing limitations, to be used
when the sentence is too complicated and can only be understood with the aid of additional memory
(writing).
 3
1.1.2. Writing and speech on the same level
In contrast with the linguists who consider writing as only a representation of speech, which is the
genuine expression of Language and the only object of study, some others have given writing
independence from speech; while accepting the existence of an underlying language system.
Josef Vachek supported the idea that the written form should be at the centre of linguistic study. He
thinks that speech and writing have complementary language functions. The spoken form carries out
dynamic functions, and the written form static ones and the difference in function makes it impossible
to say the same thing in a different medium.
M. A. K. Halliday, in his book Spoken and Written Language, follows this same line. He sees them
both as emanating from the same source, the underlying language system, and he focuses on their
differences in form and function. He considers the development of writing systems as the product of
changes in society, so the functions of writing were not intended to replace those of speech; speech
and writing serve different purposes and this leads to structural differences.
1.1.3. Supremacy of writing
Brian Stock in The Implications of Literacy suggests that the advent of writing in oral cultures can
break their patterns of behaviour, while Linnea C. Ehri suggests that the influence of print on our
language perception is similar to that of calendars and clocks on our perception of time.
In general, what lies at the back of all these ideas is that writing is the necessary prerequisite for
analytic thought, and that logical thought can only be carried out in literate societies; but, though this
was an important tendency, it seems to have passed in favour of the more logical idea that the need
for literacy is part of the development of a society which puts it into contact with new experiences
and modes of thought.
Today, a compromise exists whereby vocal and visual language are generally considered as two
equal but very different means of communication. However, any study of language must first consider
speech.

2. ELEMENTS AND RULES GOVERNING ORAL DISCOURSE

This section will be divided into two sections, first, linguistic elements and non-linguistic elements.
Secondly, rules of oral discourse focussing on rules of use, rules of usage and conversational studies.

2.1. ELEMENTS GOVERNING ORAL DISCOURSE.

Elements governing oral discourse are approached in terms of a communicative event, which is
described as a sociocultural unit where linguistic and non-linguistic elements must be taken into
account. Moreover, communicative behaviour is not limited to the creation of oral texts, as in actual
communicative situations, verbal communication is aided by paralinguistic, kinesics and proxemics.
 4
2.1.1. Linguistic elements.
Regarding the linguistic level in oral discourse, the phonological system is involved and is concerned
with the analysis of acoustic signals into a sequence of speech sounds, thus consonants, vowels, and
syllables. At this level, we find certain prosodic elements which provide us with information about
the oral interaction. Thus, stress, rhythm and intonation. Also, routines are to be dealt with, but in a
further section (Halliday 1985).
Regarding STRESS, it is present in an oral interaction when we give more emphasis to some parts of
the utterance than to other segments. It is a signalling to make a syllable stand out with respect to its
neighbouring syllables in a word or to the rest of words in a longer utterance. We may establish a
distinction between two types of stress markers, thus primary stress and secondary stress within the
same word. Primary stress is the main marker within the word and secondary stress is a less important
marker.
Foreign language learners must be concerned with the relevant role of primary stress, as a change of
stress within a word may change the whole meaning of it. For instance, a word like record may
change its meaning from verb to noun if a student does not apply the right primary stress on it. The
concept of emphasis is closely related, then, to stress. Emphasis is essential in an oral exchange of
information as it gives the message a non-literal meaning, providing foreign language students with
a choice to highlight the information they may consider important at the speaking act.
Another important element which characterizes oral interaction is RHYTHM, which is determined
by the succession of prominent and non-prominent syllables in an utterance. We will observe a quick
and monotonous rhythm if prominent and non prominent syllables take place in short equal units of
time, though not easy to find in authentic speech. On the contrary, rhythm will be inexistent and
chaotic if longer and irregular units of time take place in an utterance or speech act.
Then, we may observe that the term establishes a relationship between accents and pauses, which,
used properly, contribute to keeping attention by allowing voice inflection, change of intonation and
change of meaning. Pauses may be characterized by being predictable or not with a rhythm group.
Thus, they coincide with the boundaries of the rhythm groups by fitting in naturally, or break them
as it happens in spontaneous speech. Predictable pauses are, then, those required for the speakers to
take breath between sentences or to separate grammatical units, and unpredictable pauses are those
brought about by false starts or hesitation.
The third prosodic element is INTONATION which is characterized in general terms by the rising
and falling of voice during speech, depending on the type of utterance we may produce. In case of
statements, we will use falling intonation whereas in questions we use rising intonation. As we will
see, intonation and rhythm play an important role when expressing attitudes and emotions.
 5
As a general rule, speakers use a normal intonation when taking part in an oral interaction, but
depending on the meaning the speakers may convey, they will use a different tone within the
utterance. The tone is responsible for changes of meaning or for expressing special attitudes in the
speaker, such as enthusiasm, sadness, anger, or exasperation. Three types of intonation are involved
in a real situation. Thus, falling and rising tones, upper and lower range tones, and wide and narrow
range of tones. Respectively, they refer first, to certainty, determination or confidence when we use
falling tones in order to be conclusive whereas indecision, doubt and uncertainty is expressed by
means of rising tones to be inconclusive.
e.g. I'll do it ^ I'll do it .....if you help me
Secondly, excitement and animation on the part of the speaker is expressed by upper range tones
whereas an unanimated attitude corresponds to lower ranges. Finally, in order to express emotional
attitudes, we use a wide range of tone whereas in order to be unemotive, we rather use a narrow range
tone.
2.1.2. Non-linguistic elements.
As they speak, people often gesture, nod their heads, change their postures and facial expressions,
and redirect the focus of their gaze. Although these behaviours are not linguistic by a strict definition
of that term, their close coordination with the speech they accompany suggests that they are relevant
to an account of language use, and also, can occur apart from the context of speech, spontaneous or
voluntarily.
Conversational speech is often accompanied by gesture, and the relation of these hand movements
to the speech are usually regarded as communicative devices whose function is to amplify or
underscore information conveyed in the accompanying speech. According to one of the icons of
American linguists, Edward Sapir, people respond to gesture with extreme alertness, in accordance
with an elaborate and secret code that is written nowhere, known to none, and understood by all
(Sapir 1921). Gestures are then, to be classified in different types, such as emblems or symbolic
gestures as essentially hand signs with well established meanings (thumbs-up and V for victory,
pointing, denial, and refusing).
In contrast, we may find simple and repetitive rhythmic hand movements coordinated with sentence
prosody, called batons, as using head and shoulders. Also, unplanned gestures that accompany
spontaneous speech, called gesticulations, representational gestures, or lexical movements, related
to semantic content of speech in order to describe things like size, strength or speed.
Concerning FACIAL EXPRESSION, it deals with an automatic response to an internal state although
they can be controlled voluntarily to a considerable extent, and are used in social situations to convey
a variety of kinds of information (smiling and happiness). Changes in addressees' facial expressions
 6
allows the addressee to express understanding, concern, agreement, or confirmation where
expressions such as smiles and head nods as considered as back-channels.
In relation to GAZE DIRECTION, a variety of kinds of significance has been attributed to both the
amount of time participants spend looking at each other, and to the points in the speech stream at
which those glances occur, such as staring, watching, peering or looking among others. As proximity,
body-orientation or touching, gazing may express the communicators' social distance, by means of
looking up to or looking down to.
The primary medium by which language is expressed, speech, also contains a good deal of
information that can be considered non-verbal. A speaker's voice transmits individuating information
concerning his or her age, gender, region of origin, social class, and so on. In addition to this relatively
static information, transient changes in vocal quality provide information about changes in the
speaker's internal state, such as hesitation or interjections. Changes in a speaker's affective states
usually are accompanied by changes in the acoustic properties of his or her voice (Krauss and Chiu
1993), and listeners seem capable of interpreting these changes, even when the quality of the speech
is badly degraded, or the language is one the listener does not understand.
2.2. RULES GOVERNING ORAL DISCOURSE.
A communicative competence theory accounts for rules of usage and rules of use in order to get a
proficiency level in a foreign language within the framework of social interaction, personal,
professional or educational fields.
Then, rules of usage are concerned with the language users' knowledge of linguistic or grammatical
rules (linguistic or grammatical competence) whereas rules of use are concerned with the language
users' ability to use his knowledge of linguistic rules in order to achieve effectiveness of
communication, that is, discourse, sociolinguistic and strategic competences.
2.2.1. Rules of usage.
As we have previously seen, language is the principal vehicle for the transmission of cultural
knowledge, and the primary means by which we gain access to the contents of others' minds. It is
also considered as the ability to speak and be understood by others. This involves an ability to produce
and therefore, understand the same sounds produced by others. The ways languages are used are
constrained by the way they are constructed, particularly the linguistic rules that govern the
permissible usage forms, for instance, grammatical rules. Language is defined as an abstract set of
principles that specify the relations between a sequence of sounds and a sequence of meanings, and
is analysed in terms of four levels of organization. Thus, the phonological, the morphological, the
syntactic, and the semantic levels which, taken together, constitute its grammar.
Firstly, the phonological system is concerned with the phonological knowledge a speaker has in order
to produce sounds which form meaningful sentences. For instance, an analysis of an acoustic signal
 7
into a sequence of speech sounds, thus consonants, vowels, and syllables, will allow the speaker to
distinguish plural, past, and adverb endings, as well as to recognize foreign accents that are distinctive
for a particular language or dialect or produce voiced or voiceless stops, fricatives or plosives sounds
in their appropriate contexts.
Secondly, the morphological system is concerned with the way words and meaningful sub-words are
constructed out of these phonological elements. Morphology involves internal structures by means
of which the speakers are able to recognize whether a word belongs to the target language or not.
This is achieved by means of morphological rules that follow a regular pattern, such as suffixes and
prefixes. These rules that determine the phonetic form of certain patterns, such as plural, regular
simple past or gerunds, are named morphophonemic rules, as they are applied by both morphology
and phonology. Therefore, when a non-native word is added to the target language, they do it by
means of morphological rules which belong to that vernacular language, such as derivation,
compounding, blending or back-formation.
Thirdly, the syntactic system is concerned with that part of grammar which stands for speakers'
knowledge of how to structure phrases and sentences in an appropriate and accurate way to express
our thoughts. These syntactic rules permit speakers to produce and understand an unlimited number
of sentences never produced or heard before.
Finally, the semantic system is concerned with the meanings of these higher level units. Semantics is
concerned with the linguistic competence in terms of a capacity to produce meaning within an
utterance. The arbitrariness of language implies to comprehend sentences because we know the
meaning of individual words. Nevertheless, speaking a language not only involves knowing the
meaning of words but also knowing how to combine language rules to convey meaning within an
utterance. Thus, we may find rules involved in the semantics of the sentence, such as subject-verb
concord in terms of third person singular; rules to interpret phrasal verbs within prepositional phrases;
different nuances brought about semantic fields in verbs, such as the degree of loudness when
speaking (shouting and whispering), the time nuance when looking (watching, staring, or gazing), or
the degree of touch (stroking or hitting) among others.
However, linguistic rules do not follow a strict pattern in everyday use. We may distinguish mainly
three types of semantic rule violation. Thus, anomaly a violation of semantic rule to create nonsense
as in "Colourless green ideas sleep furiously” where as we can see the words colourless and green
are incompatible; metaphors, with no literal meaning but connected to abstract meaning; and finally,
idioms, in which the meaning of an expression may not be related to the individual meaning of its
parts as it makes no sense as they are culturally embedded, as in the expression "Pull someone's leg".
 8
2.2.2. Rules of use.
The notion of use means the realization of the language system as meaningful communication linked
to the aspects of performance. This notion is based on the effectiveness for communication, by means
of which an utterance with a well-formed grammatical structure may or may not have a sufficient
value for communication in a given context.
Regarding rules of use in order to get a proficiency level in a foreign language, students are concerned
with the language users' ability to use his knowledge of linguistic rules, that is, discourse,
sociolinguistic and strategic competences.
Students, then, are intended to apply their linguistic knowledge to how to construct discourse within
the textual competence according to three main rules of appropriateness, coherence and cohesion,
as main discourse devices. Considerations on this sort require a distinction be drawn between the
semantic or literal meaning of an utterance and its intended meaning.
Concerning appropriateness, any language presents variations within a linguistic community. Each
member speaks or writes in a different way. Besides, these types of discourse have a formal structure
that constrains participants' acts of speaking and each person chooses the language variety and the
appropriate register according to the situation, thus the issue, channel of communication, purpose,
and degree of formality.
Another discourse device is coherence which deals with the use of information in a speech act
regarding the selection of relevant or irrelevant information, and the organization of the
communicative structure in a certain way, such as introduction, development and conclusion. The
amount of information may be necessary and relevant, or on the contrary, redundant and irrelevant.
Unnecessary repetition of what is already known or already mentioned stops communication from
being successful at comprehending the important unknown parts of the speech act.
Regarding cohesion, there is a wide range of semantic and syntactic relations within a sentence in
order to relate our speech act forming a cohesive and coherent unit by means of reference, ellipsis,
conjunction, and lexical organization. The appropriate use of these cohesive devices will enhance the
effectiveness of communication when grammaticality or context cannot be accounted for. It is
possible therefore to have a text without overt cohesive devices if the context of situation clarifies the
intended message.
2.2.3. Conversational Studies.
Conversation is the main mean by which humans communicate, and is thus vital for full and rich
social interaction. An obvious definition of conversation is a process of talking where at least two
participants freely alternate in speaking as they interact with their social environment. However, the
analysis of conversation is not a simple matter.
 9
Ethnography of communication, a concept coined by Dell Hymes, refers to a methodology based in
anthropology and linguistics allowing people to study human interaction in context.
One of their basic premises of Hymes was that the rules of speaking cannot be listed in abstract, on
the contrary they have to be defined in relation with a particular speech event. Every speech event, a
lecture, a formal dinner, a party etc., has its own rules associated, rules which derive from its own
components. The elements or components of a speech event according to them are:
S stands for setting and scene (physical circumstances);
P refers to participants including speaker, sender and addresser;
E means end (purposes and goals);
A stands for act sequence (message form and content);
K deals with key (tone and manner);
I stands for instrumentalities (verbal, non-verbal and physical channel);
N refers to norms of interaction (specific proprieties attached to speaking), and interpretation
(interpretation of norms within cultural belief system);
G, stands for genre referring to textual categories.
So once the elements of a speech event have been clarified we can set out to investigate the different
rules that govern these. The existence of these rules of speaking within each speech event does not
imply that they always have to be followed. In fact, they are broken many times in everyday
conversation. However, when both parties are supposed to share the same norms, the breaking of the
rules becomes meaningful.
eg. In the 16th century English Literature it was customary for nobles to use "you" reciprocally, to
receive "you" from their inferiors but to address their inferiors as "thou". If a speaker broke the rules,
the rule-breaking was meaningful and so they were able to insult their equals by addressing them as
"thou"
Within a conversational analysis, we find mainly two features of conversations. First, what we
understand under the convention of turn taking. Turn taking theory notices the fact that in
conversation the roles of speaker and listener change in turns which surprisingly occurs successively
without overlaps and gaps between them.
This organized exchange of roles needs certain norms since speakers usually do not like to be
interrupted or ignored in their turns. It is for this reason that speakers/listeners make use of certain
cues in order to signal their intentions. Duncan gives a set of six possible cues to signal our intention
while taking part in conversation: intonation, paralanguage, body motion, stereotyped expressions,
drops in pitch and syntax. So for example, a simple eye gaze to our interlocutor throughout
conversation may indicate that he can now take his turn.
 10
For him, there are three main levels in turn-taking. The first level refers to the highest degree of
control; he can select the next speaker either by naming or alluding to him or her. In a second degree
of control, the next utterance may be constrained by the speaker but without being selected by a
particular speaker. Finally, the third degree of control is to select neither the next speaker nor
utterance and leave it to one of the other participants.
Another fundamental feature of conversation is the idea of adjacency pairs, proposed by Goffman
(1976) and later developed by Sacks (1978). By this concept, a conversation is described as a string
of at least two turns. An example would be found in a question-answer session where exchanges in
which the first part of the pair predicts the occurrence of the second, thus 'How are you?' and 'Fine,
thanks. And you?' Both conversing parties are aware that a response is required to a question.
Moreover, a particular response to a given question is expressed by means of greetings, challenges,
offers, complaints, invitations, warnings, announcements, farewells and phone conversations.
Furthermore, another contribution to conversational analysis was Grice's (1967) Cooperative
Principle. He proposed a set of norms expected in conversation, and formulated them as a universal
to help account for the high degree of implicitness in conversation and the required relation between
rule -governed meaning and force. Therefore, Grice analyses cooperation as involving four categories
of maxims expected in conversation. Thus, the first maxim is quantity which involves speakers to
give enough and not too much information. Secondly, within quality, they are genuine and sincere,
speaking truth or facts. The third maxim, relation, makes reference to utterances which are relative
to the context of the speech (be relevant). Finally, manner represents speakers who try to present
meaning clearly and concisely, avoiding ambiguity. They are direct and straightforward.
Within conversational structure, another distinction is identified by Brown and Yule (1994), and it is
the one between 'short turns' and 'long turns'. They define them as follows: A short turn consists of
only one or two utterances; a long turn consists of a string of utterances which may last as long as an
hour's lecture. As soon as a speaker 'takes the floor' for a long turn, he takes responsibility for creating
a structured sequence of utterances which must help the listener to create a coherent mental
representation of what he is trying to say.

3. ROUTINES AND FORMULAIC SPEECH

People’s ability to be creative with language is something obvious but there are times when they
choose how, when and why not to be creative, to repeat what has been heard and said many times,
often in exactly the same form. It is in these situations that they use linguistic routines and inside
them, formulaic language.
Everyday routines and formulaic speech follow a tradition on cultural studies, called ethnography of
communication.
 11
Also, according to Seaville and Troike (1982) in his work The Ethnography of Communication,
linguistic routines are fixed utterances or sequences of utterances which must be considered as single
units, because meaning cannot be derived from consideration of any segment apart from the whole.
The routine itself, they add, fulfils the communicative function, and in this respect is performative in
nature. Routines are also analysed in terms of length, from single syllables to whole sentences, such
as 'See you!' and 'I am looking forward to seeing you again!' A sequence of sentences may be
memorized as fixed phrases, and consequently, some of them are learnt earlier and others, later. For
instance, the first routines a student learns in class are commands, such as 'Sit down or stand up',
requests, such as 'May I come in, please?' or ‘Can I have a rubber, please?'. Routines structure is
mainly given by a sociolinguistic and cultural approach to language.
Non-native speakers may not grasp the nuances regarding a certain type of utterance patterns, such
as greeting routines or phone conversation patterns, which have no meaning apart from a phatic
function and introductory sentences.
Understanding routines require a cultural knowledge because they are generally abstract in meaning
and must be interpreted at a non literal level.
Thus, Holmes and Brown (1987) address three types of failure.
Firstly, a pragmatic failure which involves the inability to understand what is meant by what is said.
Secondly, the pragmalinguistic failure which is caused by mistaken beliefs about pragmatic force of
utterance.
Finally, the sociopragmatic failure which is given by different beliefs about rights and mentionables.
People usually reject consciously routines and rituals when they are meaningless and empty of
meaning, thus condolences, funeral rituals, weddings, masses and invitations among others.
Another instance is brought about by Wolfson (1981) in developing sociocultural awareness. He goes
further on studying cross-cultural miscommunication in the field of compliments, when learners from
a different cultural background do not understand certain behaviour rules from the foreign language
target culture. Hence, ritual contexts involve formulaic language with great cultural significance. The
meaning of symbols cannot be interpreted in isolation but in context. For instance, a funeral ritual is
different in Europe and in America.
Both routines and formulaic speech meaning depend on shared beliefs and values within the speech
community coded into a sensitivity to cultural communication patterns.
There are many situations in our lives when formulaic language is used. That is the case of RITUALS.
They are made up of routines but these as mentioned above are given far greater cultural significance
for being part of a ritual context. Examples of rituals include magical incantation, religious
ceremonies and so on.
 12
The literature on cross-cultural communication breakdown is vast, as it is related to a number of
aspects such as taboos; different judgement of power and social distance between different cultures;
and different cultural values and priorities. Therefore, developing the correct and appropriate use of
these routines as part of our students’ sociocultural competence must be a priority in our classes.
4. STRATEGIES IN ORAL COMMUNICATION
In this section we address the fourth area of Communicative Competence. In the words of Canale
(1983), strategic competence is the verbal and nonverbal communication strategies that may be
called into action to compensate for breakdowns in communication due to performance variables or
due to insufficient competence.
We can describe it as the type of knowledge which we need to sustain communication with someone.
This may be achieved by paraphrase, circumlocution, repetition, hesitation, avoidance, guessing as
well as shifts in register and style. According to Canale and Swain (1980), strategic competence is
useful in various circumstances as for instance, the early stages of second language learning where
communicative competence can be present with just strategic and socio-linguistic competence.
However, oral communication strategies are not exclusive to second language learners, but also
widely used in our own mother tongue.
Communication is quite often not unproblematic due to different reasons, lack of linguistic,
sociolinguistic or sociocultural knowledge, etc. The interlocutors, once engaged in communication
and faced with difficulties can decided to abandon their communicative encounter or otherwise
consider using a varied range of strategies that despite of their linguistic, sociolinguistic or
sociocultural competence will allow them to continue and communicate effectively. Thus, Savignon
(1983) notes that one can communicate non-verbally in the absence of grammatical or discourse
competence provided there is a cooperative interlocutor. Besides, she points out the necessity and the
sufficiency for the inclusion of strategic competence as a component of communicative competence
at all levels as it demonstrates that regardless of experience and level of proficiency one never knows
all a language. This also illustrates the negotiation of meaning involved in the use of strategic
competence. So when meaning is not clear, asking for clarification by linguistic or non linguistic
means implies the use of a communication strategy that involve negotiation of meaning.
Another criterion on strategic competence proposed by Tarone (1981) is for the speaker to recognize
a meta-linguistic problem and use strategies to help getting the meaning across. Tarone includes a
requirement in these cases for the use of strategic competence: The speaker must be aware that the
linguistic structure needed to convey his meaning is not available to him or to the hearer. Strategic
competence is essential in conversation in order to overcome breakdowns and difficulties in
communication. Thus it strategic competence must be part of the speaker's communicative
competence.