Metaphorical Competence: A Neglected Component of Communicative Competence

Masoud Khalili Sabet, Marjaneh Tavakoli

Abstract


The ability to comprehend and use metaphors in L2 which is referred to as metaphorical competence is an important issue in second language acquisition. Metaphors are so pervasive in our life that we might not realize their presence and simply neglect them even in our first language. Different models of communicative competence have been suggested in the literature; however, the model of Bachman and Palmer (1996) is the one considered in the present study. It includes two major nodes of organizational and pragmatic competences. Under the organizational competence are grammatical and textual competences, and pragmatic competence includes illocutionary and sociolinguistic competences. In this paper it is argued that among the many competences required to be considered proficient in a language, metaphorical competence is also central. As such, after illuminating the concept of metaphor and metaphorical competence, some models of communicative competence (CC) are presented. Moreover, in line with Littlemore and Low (2006), it is emphasized that metaphorical competence which is present in most of the components of CC should receive more attention in L2 classrooms. In fact, it is concluded that having an acceptable metaphorical competence contributes to the learners’ overall communicative competence.

Keywords: Metaphor, Metaphorical competence, Communicative competence, L2


Full Text:

PDF

References


Aardal, C. L. (2014). Metaphor comprehension in the EFL classroom. (Unpublished master’s thesis). University of Oslo, Norway.

Andreou, G., & Galantomos, I. (2009). Conceptual competence as a component of second language fluency. J Psycholinguist Res, 38, 587–591. DOI 10.1007/s10936-009-9122-6

Bagarić, V., & Djigunović, J. M. (2007). Defining communicative competence. Metodika, 8(1), 94-103.

Beck, B. (1982). Root metaphor patterns. Semiotic Inquiry, 2, 86–97.

Cameron, L. (2003). Metaphor in educational discourse, advances in applied linguistics. London, UK: Continuum.

Canale, M. (1983). From communicative competence to communicative language pedagogy. In J. C., Richards & R. W. Schmidt (Eds.), Language and communication, (pp. 2-27). London: Longman.

Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1, 1-47.

Carston, R. (2002). Thoughts and utterances: The pragmatics of explicit communication. Blackwell Publishers Ltd.

Chapeton, C. M. (2010). Metaphor identification in EFL argumentative writing: A corpus-driven study. Folios, 32, 125-140.

Cooper, T. (1999). Processing of idioms by L2 learners of English. TESOL Quarterly, 33(2), 233-262.

Danesi, M. (1992). Metaphorical competence in second language acquisition and second language teaching: The neglected dimension. In J. E. Alatis (Ed.), Georgetown University round table on languages and linguistics (pp. 125-136). Washington D.C.: Georgetown University Press.

Danesi, M. (1994). Recent research on metaphor and teaching of Italian. Italica, 71, 453 464.

Danesi, M. (1995). Learning and teaching languages: The role of conceptual fluency. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 5(1), 3-20.

Danesi, M. (1998). Sign, thought, and culture: A basic course in semiotics. Toronto: Canadian Scholars’ Press.

Danesi, M. (1999). Expanding conceptual fluency theory for second language teaching. Mosaic, 6(4), 16-21.

Doiz, A., & Elizari, C. (2013). Metaphoric competence and the acquisition of figurative vocabulary in foreign language learning. ELIA, 13, 47-82.

Goatly, A. (1997). The language of metaphors. London: Routledge.

Haji Maibodi, A. (2011). Enhancing metaphoric competence through the cognitive approach. Journal of English Studies, 1(3), 79-87.

Holme, R. (2004). Mind, metaphor and language teaching. Hampshire and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Hwang, C. C. (2008). Pragmatic conventions and intercultural competence. The Linguistics Journal, 3(2), 31-48.

Hymes, D. H. (1972). On communicative competence. In Pride, J. B., & Holmes, J. (Eds.), Sociolinguistics, (pp. 269-293). Baltimore, USA: Penguin Education, Penguin Books Ltd.

Kövecses, Z. (2002). Metaphor- a practical introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Lakoff, G. (1993). The contemporary theory of metaphor. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (2nd Ed.) (pp. 202-251). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. L. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Lantolf, J. P., &Thorne, S. L. (2006). Sociocultural theory and the genesis of second language development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Littlemore, J. (2001). Metaphoric competence: a language learning strength of students with a holistic cognitive style. TESOL Quarterly, 35(3), 459-491.

Littlemore, J., & Low, G. (2006). Metaphoric competence and communicative language ability. Applied Linguistics 27(2), 268-294.

Low, G. (1988). On teaching metaphor. Applied Linguistics, 9(2), 125-147.

Nacey, S. (2010). Comparing linguistic metaphors in L1 and L2 English. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Oslo, Norway.

Norafkan, M. (2013). Learnability of cultural models through authentic materials: Focus on metaphorical competence and conceptual fluency (Doctoral dissertation, Simon Fraser University). Retrieved July 2015, from http://summit.sfu.ca/system/files/iritems1/13447/etd7884mnorafkan.pdf

Punter, D. (2007). Metaphor. Routledge: Oxon.

Ritchie, D. L. (2006). Context and connection in metaphor. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, Antony Rowe Ltd, Chippenham and Eastbourne.

Savignon, S. J. (1972). Communicative competence: An experiment in foreign Language teaching. Philadelphia: The Centre for Curriculum Development, Inc.

Talebinezhad, M. R. (2007). Conceptual fluency and metaphorical competence in second Language acquisition: Two sides of the same coin? Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities of Shiraz University, 26(4), 87-107.

Tyler, A. (1995). The co-construction of cross-cultural miscommunication: Conflicts in perception, negotiation, and enactment of participant role and status. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 17(2), 129-152.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

2013-2018 (CC-BY) Australian International Academic Centre PTY.LTD.

International Journal of Education and Literacy Studies  

You may require to add the 'aiac.org.au' domain to your e-mail 'safe list’ If you do not receive e-mail in your 'inbox'. Otherwise, you may check your 'Spam mail' or 'junk mail' folders.