Classroom actions guided by the communicative approach are characterised by trying to make meaningful and real communication, at all levels. As a outcome there may be more highlighting on skills than systems, lessons are more learner-centred, and there may be use of true materials.It seemed like the most progressive style and I could not visualize why anyone would not use it within their own classroom. But after applying this knowledge in the real world, I now see that there are flaws with the communicative way”The truth of the matter is that about 99 percent ofteaching is making the students feel concerned in the objectsConclusionCommunicative Language Teaching is best measured an advance rather than a method.
Thus although a sensible degree of theoretical con¬sistency can be discerned at the levels of language and learning theory, at the levels of plan and procedure there is much greater room for character interpretation and difference than most methods allow. It could be that one description among the various proposals for syllabus s, copy exercise types, and classroom activities may gain wider support in the future, giving Communicative Language Teaching a grade similar to other teaching methods. On the other hand, different interpretations might guide to homogeneous subgroups.Q2. Languages are dynamic in their structure and function; what are the functions of a language as proposed by the structural linguist Roman Jakobson? Discuss in detail. Human beings as a species is quite exclusive to this biological world for they are the only organisms known to be talented of thinking, communicating and preserving potentially an endless number of thoughts that form the pillars of modern civilization.
This unique aptitude is a result of the difficult and powerful human languages characterized by their recursive language rules and compositional semantics 40. It has been argued that language is a dynamic difficult adaptive system that has evolved through the method of self-organization to supply the purpose of human communication wants 80. The complexity of human languages have always concerned the concentration of physicists, who have tried to clarify several linguistic phenomena through models of physical systems .Languages change from each other in different respects, e.g., in their sentence formation (syntax), word structure (morphology), sound formation (phonology) and words (lexicon). However the extent and restrictions of variation are a tricky puzzle.
Another feature of human language is that it is lively. Languages modify over time. As a result, linguistic properties require not be established. For a proper understanding of language difference and language change, as obvious in the formal structure of human languages, we join three perspectives:functions of a languageJakobson’s reproduction of the functions of language distinguishes six elements, or factors of communication, that are essential for communication to occur: (1) context, (2) addresser (sender), (3) addressee (receiver), (4) contact, (5) general code and (6) message. Each factor is the central point of a relation, or function, that operates between the message and the issue The functions are the following, in order: (1) referential (“The Earth is round”), (2) sensitive (“Yuck!”), (3) conative (“Come here”), (4) phatic (“Hello?”), (5) metalingual (“What do you mean by ‘krill’?”), and (6lyrical (“Smurf”). When we analyze the functions of language for a given part (such as a word, a text or an image), we identify to which class or type it belongs (e.g., a textual or pictorial genre), which functions are present/absent, and the individuality of these functions, including the hierarchical kindred and any other relations that may operate between them.