0

TEMA 3. EL PROCESO DE COMUNICACIÓN.

FUNCIONES DEL LENGUAJE. LA LENGUA EN USO.
LA NEGOCIACIÓN DEL SIGNIFICADO

0.- Introduction.

1.- Language and communication.

1.1.- Communication

1.2.- Language

1.2.1.- Semiotics

2.- The Functions of Language.

2.1.- Roman Jakobson

2.2.- Modern classification.

3.- Language in use

3.1.- Behaviourism

3.2.- Cognitivism

3.3.- Pragmatics

4.-The negotiation of meaning

5.- Conclusion

6.- Bibliography

0.- INTRODUCTION
Language is mainly used for communication purposes, and it has
frequently been defined as the main code used by human for communication
purposes. But, in spite of this, communication and language are different
terms, and they cannot be equalled. Language has other functions apart from
being a means of communication and, on the other hand, communication can

0
 1
be achieved without using any language. This topic deals with these main
concepts. We will review them, and emphasis will be laid in the way how
language is used and how meaning is transmitted and negotiated between
speakers when actual communication takes place.
1.- COMMUNICATION AND LANGUAGE.
1.1.- Communication.
Communication is understood as “the exchange and negotiation of
information between, at least, two individuals through the use of verbal or
non-verbal symbols”. Such information is not fixed, but it is always changing
and qualified by factors as further information, context of communication,
choice of language forms and non-verbal behaviour. According to Palmer
(1978), authentic communication involves a “reduction of uncertainty”. That is
to say, if uncertainty on the side of at least one of the participants is not
reduced, communication does not take place.
Roman Jakobson (1896-1982, one of the founders of the Prague School
of linguistics), from a Structuralist point of view, provided a diagram to
explain how the communication process takes place. This model is not the only
one, but it is the best-known model, because of its simplicity.

CHANNEL

ISSUER MESSAGE RECEIVER

REFERENT

CODE

- ISSUER (also called “encoder” or “addresser”): The participant who

addresses a message to another one.

1
 2
- RECEIVER (“addressee” or “decoder”): The participant who gets the
message. It can be, or not, the one selected by the issuer. For instance, if a
person overhears a private conversation, s/he is the receiver, but not the
selected one.
- MESSAGE: The information the issuer wants to transmit.
- CHANNEL: The physical medium used to transmit the message.
- CODE: The group of symbols and usage rules in which the message is
expressed. It can be linguistic (a language) or non-linguistic, but it has to be
known by both the issuer and the receiver; the issuer has to encode the
message, the receiver will decode it.
- CONTEXT: The overall situation surrounding the communication
process. According to Halliday, it has three main elements: tenor, field and
mode (see topic 29).
Later on, other elements were added to Jakobson’s diagram:
- ENTROPY or NOISE diminishes the integrity of the message and
distorts it, so that the receiver may find decodification difficult.
- REDUNDANCY is the repetition of elements within a message. It
prevents the failure of communication because of entropy.
- FEEDBACK: The sources tend to be responsive to their own behaviour
and to the context; interaction between human beings cannot function without
the ability of the message sender to calculate the effect of his/her own words
in the listener, and self-correct if necessary.
Communication is fundamental in current methods of language
teaching, most of which are based on the concept of COMMUNICATIVE
COMPETENCE (see topic 4).

1.2.- Language.
Although the term “language” has innumerable definitions, it is widely
accepted that languages are the main codes used by humans for
communication. According to the Dutch linguist Simon S. Dik, it has to
accomplish a communicative function but, as we will see later, it may also
accomplish other functions.
Different authors have attempted to define the essential characteristics
of human language. Hall, for example, says that human language has two

2
 3
main characteristics: it is oral-auditory, and it is made up by arbitrary
symbols.
Using a different approach, Charles F. Hockett (1916- ) used a zoological
mode of enquiry to describe spoken human language, by comparing it with
other forms of communication found in animals or humans. He suggested a set
of 13 design features of communication using spoken human language.
1. Auditory-vocal channel. Sound is used between mouth and ear, as opposed
to a visual or tactile means.
2. Broadcast transmission and directional reception. A signal can be heard by
any auditory system within earshot, and the source can be located using
the ear’s direction-finding ability.
3. Rapid fading. Auditory signals are transitory, unlike writing.
4. Interchangeability. Speakers of a language can reproduce any linguistic
message they can understand, unlike the courtship behaviour in some
animal species.
5. Total feedback. Speakers hear and can reflect upon everything that they
say, unlike the visual displays in animal courtship, which are not visible to
the displayer.
6. Specialization. The sound waves’ function is to signal meaning, unlike the
audible panting of dogs, with a biological purpose.
7. Semanticity. The elements of the signal have a meaning, unlike dog
panting, which does not mean that the dog is hot, but is a part of being hot.
8. Arbitrariness. There is no relation between the signal and the nature of the
reality to which it refers, unlike the speed of the bee dancing, which
reflects the distance from the nectar.
9. Discreteness. All sound elements of speech contrast with each other, unlike
growling which is differentiated by the strength.
10. Displacement. It is possible to talk about events remote in place and
time to the moment of talking, unlike animal cries.
11. Productivity. There is an infinite capacity to express and understand
meaning, unlike the fixed set of calls of animals.
12. Traditional transmission. Language is transmitted from one generation
to the next by a process of teaching and learning, unlike bees ability which
is passed genetically.

3
 4
13. Duality of patterning. The sounds of language have no meaning, but
combine in different ways to form elements that convey meaning (words),
unlike animal calls, which do not have these two levels of structure.

1.3.- Semiotics.
Semiotics is the science which studies the structure of all possible sign
systems. So, it studies language as well as other ways of communication, that
is to say, non-linguistic communication. Semiotics distinguishes five modes of
communication, which are related to the five senses: auditory-vocal, visual,
tactile, olfactory and gustatory. Let’s see which role they play in human
communication:
 Auditory-vocal. The structured use of this mode results in speech. It is also
possible non-linguistic uses of the vocal tract, as snoring or whistling.
 Visual. This mode has a linguistic use in deaf sign languages or writing
language. Writing-based codes such as Morse are also included here.
Non linguistic use of the visual communication include the system of facial
and body language, studied by kinesics.
 Tactile. Tactile communication has a very limited linguistic function, in
deaf-blind language and secret codes based on spoken or written language.
Its main uses are non-linguistic.
The communicative use of the visual and tactile mode is known as “non-
verbal communication” or, in everyday terms, as “body language”
(proxemics).
 Olfactory and gustatory. These modes have very little role in human
communication, in contrast with the important role they play in animal
communication.

2.- THE FUNCTIONS OF LANGUAGE.

We are so familiar with speech and writing that we don’t appreciate the
complexity of the skills we have learnt. Most of all, when we try to define the
functions of language. The most widely recognised function of language is “to
communicate our ideas”.

4
 5
One of the classifications of the functions was made by the
anthropologist Malinowski (1923), who distinguished two uses of the
language. The first, the practical and pragmatic use of the language was
subdivided into active and narrative. The second was the ritual or magical use
of the language.
A different classification was made by Karl Bühler (1934). He
differentiated the expressive language, oriented to the speaker; the conative
language, oriented to the listener, and the third person, oriented to the rest of
the reality. This distinction is based on Plato’s theories.

2.1.- Jakobson.
The Prague School, and particularly Roman Jakobson (1960) adapted
Bühler’s scheme. He called Bühler’s functions, respectively, emotive, conative,
and referential, and added three more functions: poetic, phatic and
metalinguistic. These functions are closely related to the scheme of
communication we have previously seen:
- The emotive function is oriented towards the issuer of the message, who
expresses his/her own feelings and emotions. E.g. “I hate this!”
- The conative function is oriented towards the receiver of the language; the
speaker wants to make him/her do something. E.g.: “Pete, open the door.”
- The referential function is oriented towards the referent, that is, to the
extralinguistic situation to which the message refers. E.g. “That book is
green”.
- The poetic function is oriented towards the form of the message, as in
poetry.
- The phatic function is oriented towards the channel. It’s the function which
appears in the messages whose function is to establish or maintain
communication. E.g. “Hello! How are you?”
- The metalinguistic function is oriented towards the code. It is used when
we use the language to speak about language, as in “What does
‘communicate’ mean?”

2.2.- Modern classification.

5
 6
Nowadays, linguists have identified several other functions where the
communication of ideas plays an irrelevant role.

- Emotional expression.
It is called “emotive” or “expressive” function of language, and it is one of
the commonest uses of language, a way of getting rid of our nervousness and
stress.
Emotive language can be used whether or not we are alone. Swear
words and obscenities are probably the commonest signals to be used in this
way, especially when we are in an angry or frustrated mood. But there are also
many emotive utterances of a positive kind, such as our involuntary verbal
reactions to beautiful art or scenery, or the expression of affection.
The most common linguistic expressions of emotion consist of
conventional words or phrases (“Gosh”, “What a sight”, “Darn it”) and
interjections (“Ugh”, “Wow”, “Oops”). Also the prosody, and the
suprasegmental elements provide an outlet for our attitudes while we speak.

- Social interaction.
Its function is to maintain a comfortable relationship between people,
rather than to communicate anything. They are used in order to avoid a
situation which both parties might find embarrassing. Sentences performing
this functions are, for example, “Good morning”, or “Pleased to meet you”.
This kind of sentences are usually automatically produced, and stereotyped in
structure.
Malinowski called this function phatic communion, because it arises out of
the basic human need of friendship or, at least, of lack of enmity. In fact, if
someone remains silent when one of this sentences is expected, it is a sign of
distance, and it creates a feeling of uneasiness.
It has to be noted that cultures vary greatly in the topics which they permit
as phatic communion; moreover, phatic communion itself is not universal:
some cultures prefer silence.

- The power of sound.

There are many situations where the only apparent reason to use language
is the effect the sounds have on the users or listeners. That is the case of such

6
 7
different examples as rhythmical litanies on religious groups, repetitive
rhythms in children rhymes, dialogue chants used by prisoners, language
games and even the voices of individuals singing in the bathroom.
- The control of reality.
All forms of supernatural belief involve the use of the language as a means
of controlling the forces that the believers feel affect their lives. So, the
various prayers directed to different Gods are very distinctive forms of
language. The communication achieved by means of these formulae are
unusual, because we don’t really know if there is a receiver, and the response
is appreciated only in the mind of the speaker.
In other cases, the language is used to make things happen. This is known
as performative function. Its main characteristics is that utterances
performing this function are highly formulaic, only some determined people
can use this formulae to perform the performative function and they are often
uttered in ceremonies. Examples of this use of the language are “I declare you
husband and wife” (only when said by a priest or judge) or “I baptize you”
(only when said by a priest).

- Recording the facts.

When language is used for the purposes of recording facts (in cases such as
historical records, accounts, business, scientific records...) it is very different
than that used in everyday situations. It needs a much higher degree of
organisation, impersonality and explicitness because it is impossible to predict
who may use it in the future. The availability of this material guarantees the
knowledge-base of future generations.
- The instrument of thought.
People often feel the need to speak their thoughts aloud, as it helps their
concentration. The most common use of this function of language is when
people perform mathematical calculations “in their heads”. This supposedly
mental activity is often accompanied by a verbal commentary.

- The expression of identity.

Many situations display language that unites rather than inform, as for
instance the chants of a crowd at football matches, which inform which team
are they supporting, or the shouting of slogans at public meetings.

7
 8
On the other hand, our natural use of language offers unconscious data
about the speaker, especially about regional origins, level of education, social
background, sex, occupation, age...

3.- LANGUAGE IN USE

In this point we will review how language is used, according to three
major linguistic theories: behaviourism, cognitivism and pragmatics. The most
important aspects of these theories are developed in topic 12.

3.1. BEHAVIOURISM
From this point of view, any action consists of a stimulus that causes a
reaction to happen. This reaction can be reinforced. This process is
represented by the following diagram:
S  R (r)
Positive reinforcement will lead to repetition and, in the long run, to
learning. If the reaction is reinforced negatively, it will not be repeated.
Language is regarded as a substitute linguistic reaction. When a human
being has a stimulus, s/he can have a “normal” physical reaction. But s/he can
also have a substitutive linguistic reaction, which will become the stimulus for
the hearer. So that, language allows for other people to show the reaction,
when somebody has the stimulus.
S1  (R1S2)  R2
|_______________|

3.2. COGNITIVISM
From this point of view, we should bear in mind the well-known
difference between competence and performance devised by Chomsky. It is
obvious, then, that there is a clear difference between the system itself and
the innumerable users speakers may make of it.

3.3. PRAGMATICS

Chomsky developed the concept of COMMUNICATIVE COMPETENCE.

He conseiders grammar as a “mental organ” or “mental faculty” that is useful

8
 9
for the use and functions of language. Chomsky was more interested in
COMPETENCE than in PERFORMANCE.
But in the 80ies there is a shift of direction in linguistics: from
COMPETENCE to PERFORMANCE. From a formal paradigm to functional
paradigm.
Between these new philosophers of the language we find:
J. Austin, How to do things with words
J. Searle, Speech Acts
P. Grice, Logic and Conversation

The OBJECTIVE of pragmatics is the study of the Language in Use, of

the relationship between the linguistic expression and the users:
 What you say
 What you mean
 What the hearer understands

Nowadays we cannot understand language without pragmatics.

Leech´s (1983) definition of Pagmatics: “Pragmatics is the way language
is used in communication”
Prqagmatics studies the realtion between ABSTRACT MEANING or
sense of the linguistic expression and the COMMUNICATIVE FORCE which
those expressions have for speakers and listeners.
One traditional distinction of language contrasts pragmatics with syntax
and semantics:
 Semantics considers meaning as an abstract
 Pragmatics considers menaing in a specific context

Abstract meaning – semantics

Intended meaning – pragmatics
According to Leech (1983): Semantics is rule governed and
Pragmatics is principle governed. Where Rules constitute the activity, and
Principles regulate the activity.
Pragmatics studies the “Utterances” not the sentences.

9
 10
AUSTIN together with GRICE developed the SPEECH ACT THEORY.
They considered that verbal utterances were social actions, and that
sentences in a specific context are assigned additional meaning.
Austin considered that when using language (speech acts) we are
actually performing 3 acts at the same time:
 Locutionary Act: the physical act of speaking
 Illocutionary Act: the effect the speaker intends to produce with
his/her act, his/her intended meaning.
 Perlocutionary Act: the effect it has on the hearer.
He also distinguished the “PERFORMATIVE VERBS” (inside the
illocutionary acts), that perform an action by the simple fact of being used
(e.g. apologize, promise, name, ...)
The Speech Acts (the actions performed by the utterances) are given
specific lables: apology, complaint, promise, request, ...
The intention of the speaker is very important, the same words can
refer to different speech acts. In this way SEARLE believed that the basic unit
of human linguistic communication is the ILLOCUTIONARY ACT.

Another important element is that of IMPLICATURE introduced by

GRICE. More is being communicated than is being said. You communicate
more than you say and you must have some COOPERATIVE PRINCIPLES to
understand what they mean. GRICE elaborated 4 subprinciples called
MAXIMS

1. The maxim of quality states that speakers' contributions to

a conversation ought to be true. They should not say what they
believe to be false, nor should they say anything for which they
lack adequate evidence.
2. The maxim of quantity states that the contribution should
be as informative as is required for the purposes of the
conversation. One should say neither too little nor too much.
3. The maxim of relevance states that contributions should
clearly relate to the purpose of the exchange.

10
 11
4. The maxim of manner states that the contribution should be
perspicuous -in particular, that it should be orderly and brief,
avoiding obscurity and ambiguity.
Other maxims have also been proposed, such as 'Be polite',
'Behave consistently'. The principle of relevance has recently
attracted most attention, as it has been proposed as a fundamental
explanatory principle for a theory of human communication (D.
5perber & D. Wilson, 1986).
Listeners will normally assume that speakers are following
these criteria. Speakers may of course break these maxims -for
example, they may lie, be sarcastic, try to be different, or clever
-but conversation proceeds on the assumption that they are not
doing so. Listeners may then draw inferences from what speakers
have said (the literal meaning of the utterance) concerning what
they have not said (the implications, or 'implicatures' of the
utterance).
GRICE observs 5 different ways of non-observance os the
MAXIMS:

 Flouting a maxim: a speaker fails to observ a maxim

blatantly, because s/he wants the hearer to look for a meaning
which is different from, or in addition to the expressed
meaning. E.g. there are two possible killers, and one of them
was with me at the time of the murderer – The speaker
deliberately generates an implicature.
 Violating a maxim: the unostentatious non observance of a
maxim. If a speaker violates a maxim s/he will probably be
missunderstood. E.g. A man says to his wife: “Is there another
man?” And the wife answers: “No, there is not another man”
when in fact it was a woman.
11
 12
 Infringing a maxim: it is unvoluntarily, because of imperfect
linguistic performance rather from any desire on part of the
speaker to generate an implicature.
 Opting out a maxim: indicating unwillingness to cooperate
in the way the maixm requires. Examples of it occur
frequently in public life, when a speaker cannot perhaps by
legal or ethical reasons reply the way expected.
 Suspending a maxim: there are occasions when there is no
need to opt out of observing the maxims because there are
certain events in which there are no expectations on the part
of any participant that they will be fulfilled.

All these skills are naturally adopted and performed by

native speakers of the language whi have a great command of
them. But learning the use of the language of a L2 is quite difficult
becuase it involves a series of extralinguistic (cultural) elements
that L2 sutdents are not familiar with. So our aim as teachers is
trying to provide our students with these extralinguistic skills in
order to make them acquire a good command of the English
language in real situations.

4.- THE NEGOTIATION OF MEANING

Whenever oral interaction takes place, there exists a problem regarding
the meaning of the utterances. In order to deal with such a problem, we
should start by defining what “meaning” is. According to Hjelmslev, meaning
in conversation becomes a relative value depending upon the relationships
which are to be established among the elements that constitute a language.
Competent language users know what the words mean literally. And they
also know that, given the different functions of language, it is not always used
in a literal way. Therefore, in order to interact linguistically, speakers need to

12
 13
know how to operate grammatically and how to be sensitive to changes in
word value. This is not always something speakers do automatically, and that’s
why a constant negotiation of meaning between speaker and addressee is
required. Such a negotiation of meaning is carried out by means of the use of
strategies and techniques (also called tactics). (See topic 40)
Communication strategies are conversational devices used to avoid
trouble, such as checking the meaning, selecting the topic or predicting.
Communicative tactics are the devices used to solve problems, such as
asking for clarification or repetition, or even switching topics.
Speakers, thus, use a combination of both strategies and techniques in
order to negotiate meaning, achieving in this way their communicative
purposes.

From the point of view of L2 learners, we find this negotiation of menaing in

conversations including natice speakers for example. The learner and native
speaker together strive to overcome the communicative difficulties which are
always likely to arise as a result of the learner's limited L2 resources. In this
case we would also find that the srtategies used would be checking
comprehension, or the tactics request for clarification, even using a slow pace,
repeating utterances or stressing key words (by part of the native speaker).
The learner also needs to contribute to the negotiation of meaning, however,
as it is a joint enterprise. He can do so by giving clear signals when he has
understood or not understood and, most important, by refusing to give up. The
result of the negotiation of meaning is that particular types of input and
interaction result. In particular it has been hypothesized that negotiation
makes input comprehensible and, in this way promotes SLA.
It can be interesting how native speakers are able to adjust their speech, and
we find three possible ways:

 regression the native speaker unconsciously moves back through the

stages of development that characterized his own acquisition of the
language until he reaches an appropriate level for the person he is
addressing.

13
 14
 matching the native speaker assesses the learner's language system
and then imitates the language forms he identifies in it.
 negotiation the native speaker simplifies and clarifies in accordance
with the feedback that he obtains from the learner. Hatch (1983b)
considers all three explanations and concludes that (3) is the most
convincing. She argues that regression is very unlikely and is not borne
out by the observed features of foreigner talk. Matching is asking a lot
of the native speaker to measure simultaneously the learner's phonology
, lexicon, syntax, and discourse with sufficient accuracy to adjust his
own language output. Negotiation provides an interactional rather than
a psycholinguistic explanation. It does not tell us what mental processes
the native speaker operates in order to make adjustments to his speech.

5.- CONCLUSION.
As a conclusion, it is interesting to speak about the classroom
implications of the teaching of languages as a communicative tool:
- Interaction with the group is essential.
- Language should be taught using a communicative approach, and
therefore it should be fluency-focused.
- Students should be provided with as many opportunities of genuine
practice as possible.
- Students should acquire communicative competence in order to be able
to get the meaning of an utterance, even if the use of different functions of the
language makes it difficult.
- Students should be provided with strategies and techniques to
overcome their communicative problems.

Bibliography:
Austin, John. 1962. How to Do Things with Words. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Bach & Harnish, 1979 Linguistic Communication and Speech Acts
Bloomfield. L. 1935. Language . New York: holt, Rinehart & Wilson

14
 15
Bühler, Karl. 1934/1965. Sprachtheorie. Die Darstellungsfunktion der
Sprache. Stuttgart: Fischer.
Canale, M. & SWAIN. M. 1980. «Theoretical bases of communicative
approaches to second language teaching and testing». Applied Linguistics
1/1: 1-47. ,
Canale, M. 1983. "From communicative competence to communicative
language pedagogy". In RICHARDS, J.C. & SCHMIDT, R. W. (Eds.): Language
and Communication. New York: Longman.
Chomsky, N.A. 1959. "Review of B.F. Skinner. Verbal Behaviour". Language
35 : 26-58
Coulthard, Malcolm. 1985. An Introduction to Discourse Analysis. London:
Longman.
Dik Simon S. 1989; revised version 1997 . The Theory of Functional
Grammar.
Faerch, C. & KASPER, G. (Eds.) .1983. Strategies in Interlanguage
Communication. London: Longman.
Grice, H.P. 1975. Logic and Conversation. In P.Cole & J.L. Morgan )eds.),
Speech acts. New York: Academic Press), 41-58.
Halliday, M.A.K. & Hassan, R. 1976. Cohesion in English. Longman.
Hockett, C. F. 1958. A Course on Modern Linguistics. New York Macmillan
Hockett, C. F. 1960. The origin of speech. Scientific American 203
(September)
Hymes, D.H. 1972. "On communicative competence". In Pride, J.B. & Holmes,
J.(eds.): Sociolinguislics. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
JAKOBSON . R. 1960. Concluding Statement: Linguistics and Poetics
Jakobson, R.& Halle, M. 1956. Fundamentals of language. The Hague :
Mouton
Littlewood, W. 1984. Foreign l and Second Language Lear/ling. Cambridge:
C.U.P.
Miller. 1951 Language and Communication
Searle, John. 1969. Speech Acts. An Essay in the Philosophy of Language.
Cambridge: CUP.

Skinner, B.F. 1957. Verbal Behavior. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.

Widdowson, H.G. 1978. Teaching Language as Communication. Oxford: O.U.P.

15
16

16