Linguistic competence: Theory and empiry

Abstract

Christian Lehmann University of Erfurt AbstractLanguage competence has sometimes been used as an idealized notion which somehow embodies the collective knowledge of a speech community in the person of an ideal speaker-hearer. However, the basic notion is the competence of an individual in a language. If the language in question is not the native language, it is taken for granted that the person may be proficient in the language to some degree. The standard is then generally set by native competence. However, native competence is itself a matter of degree. Consequently, objective criteria are required by which one may assess the competence of a person in one or more languages by a common standard. This presupposes a notion of 'linguistic competence' which has empirical import. The paper tries to articulate a concept of linguistic competence which can be converted into language tests. A test was devised on this basis and administered to groups of native and non-native speakers of German. The results of the experiment suggest that there is no difference in principle between native and foreign language competence, whether on theoretical or empirical grounds.

Grammar is the heart of language: grammar and its role in language learning among Finnish university students

“…This answer reflects the idea that a reflexive competence supports a procedural one (see Lehmann 2007). Other formulations view grammar as a tool:…”

The role of incremental and superficial processing in the depth charge illusion: Experimental and modeling evidence

“…Nevertheless, it is striking that compositional information can be completely disregarded, especially in the canonical No X is too Y to Z configuration, and that the non-compositional mode of processing is sophisticated enough to be sensitive to manipulations of the interpretation world. The consistent contribution of world knowledge to meaning implies that the use of this particular source of information can be regarded as a kind of linguistic competence that does not necessarily depend on compositional interpretation (Coseriu, 1985;Fortuin, 2014;Lehmann, 2007).…”

Linguistic Competence as One of Aspects of Well-Being in Modern Society

“…Coincidently, native speakers are experts at different rates, so they cannot contribute to an absolute degree quality. Substantively, the competence of a language speaker has to be evaluated by the same standard characteristics as the competence of a non-native one (Lehmann Christian, 2006). A lot in linguistic competence comes down to knowledge of a scope of items, e.g.…”

“…Also language competence is also viewed at three levels (Lehmann, 2006): 1. general linguistic competence that is fluent, declamatory intellection (speaking in accordance with motives and world knowledge), 2. language-specific competence that is idiomatic intellection (authority over units and activities of a given system of language), 3. argumentative competence that is expressive intellection (the appliance of such units and activities efficient about the philological and nonlinguistic context). So linguistic knowledge is reflection on certain ability.…”