GRAMMATICAL ACCURACY

C2 Maintains consistent grammatical control of complex language, even while attention is otherwise engaged (e.g. in forward planning, in monitoring others’ reactions).

C1 Consistently maintains a high degree of grammatical accuracy; errors are rare and difficult to spot.

Good grammatical control; occasional ‘slips’ or non-systematic errors and minor flaws in sentence structure may still occur, but they are rare and can often be corrected in retrospect.

B2

Shows a relatively high degree of grammatical control. Does not make mistakes which lead to misunderstanding.

Communicates with reasonable accuracy in familiar contexts; generally good control though with noticeable mother tongue influence. Errors occur, but it is clear what he/she is trying to express. B1

Uses reasonably accurately a repertoire of frequently used ‘routines’ and patterns associated with more predictable situations.

A2 Uses some simple structures correctly, but still systematically makes basic mistakes – for example tends to mix up tenses and forget to mark agreement; nevertheless, it is usually clear what he/she is trying to say.

A1 Shows only limited control of a few simple grammatical structures and sentence patterns in a learnt repertoire.

A distinction is traditionally drawn between morphology and syntax.

Morphologydeals with the internal organisation of words. Words may be analysed into morphemes, classed as:

• roots, or stems;

• affixes (prefixes, suffixes, infixes), including: word-forming affixes (e.g. re-, un-, -ly, -ness); inflexional affixes (e.g. s, -ed, -ing).

Word-formation:

Words may be classified into:

• simple words (root only, e.g. six, tree, break);

• complex words (root + affixes, e.g. unbrokenly, sixes);

• compound words (containing more than one root, e.g. sixpence, breakdown, oak-tree, evening dress).

Users of the Framework may wish to consider and where appropriate state: • on which theory of grammar they have based their work;

• which grammatical elements, categories, classes, structures, processes and relations are learners, etc. equipped/required to handle.

Morphology also deals with other ways of modifying word forms, e.g.: • vowel alteration (sing/sang/sung, mouse/mice)

• consonant modification (lend/lent)

• irregular forms (bring/brought, catch/caught)

• suppletion (go/went)

• zero forms (sheep/sheep, cut/cut/cut)

Morphophonology deals with the phonetically conditioned variation of morphemes (e.g. English s/z/iz in walks, lies, rises; t/d/id in laughed, cried, shouted), and their morph- ologically conditioned phonetic variation (e.g. i:/e in creep/crept, mean/meant, weep/ wept).

Syntaxdeals with the organisation of words into sentences in terms of the categories, elements, classes, structures, processes and relations involved, often presented in the form of a set of rules. The syntax of the language of a mature native speaker is highly complex and largely unconscious. The ability to organise sentences to convey meaning is a central aspect of communicative competence.

5.2.1.3 Semantic competence

deals with the learner’s awareness and control of the organisation of meaning. Lexical semanticsdeals with questions of word meaning, e.g.:

• relation of word to general context: reference;

connotation;

exponence of general specific notions; • interlexical relations, such as:

synonymy/antonymy; hyponymy; collocation; part-whole relations; componential analysis; translation equivalence.

Users of the Framework may wish to consider and where appropriate state:

• what grammatical elements, categories, classes, structures, processes and relations learners will need/be equipped/required to handle.

Users of the Framework may wish to consider and where appropriate state:

• what morphological elements and processes the learner will need/be equipped/required to handle.

The user/learner’s competences

Grammatical semantics deals with the meaning of grammatical elements, categories, structures and processes (see section 5.2.1.2).

Pragmatic semantics deals with logical relations such as entailment, presupposition, implicature, etc.

Questions of meaning are of course central to communication and are treated passimin this Framework (see particularly section 5.1.1.1).

Linguistic competence is treated here in a formal sense. From the point of view of theoretical or descriptive linguistics, a language is a highly complex symbolic system. When an attempt is made, as here, to separate out the many different components of com- municative competence, knowledge (largely unconscious) of and ability to handle formal structure is legitimately identifiable as one of those components. How much, if indeed any, of this formal analysis should enter into language learning or teaching is a different matter. The functional/notional approach adopted in the Council of Europe publications Waystage 1990, Threshold Level 1990and Vantage Leveloffers an alternative to the treatment of linguistic competence in Section 5.2.1–3. Instead of starting from language forms and their meanings, it starts from a systematic classification of communicative functions and of notions, divided into general and specific, and secondarily deals with forms, lexical and grammatical, as their exponents. The approaches are complementary ways of dealing with the ‘double articulation’ of language. Languages are based on an organisation of form and an organisation of meaning. The two kinds of organisation cut across each other in a largely arbitrary fashion. A description based on the organisation of the forms of expression atomises meaning, and that based on the organisation of meaning atomises form. Which is to be preferred by the user will depend on the purpose for which the description is produced. The success of the Threshold Level approach indicates that many practitioners find it more advantageous to go from meaning to form rather than the more traditional practice of organising progression in purely formal terms. On the other hand, some may prefer to use a ‘communicative grammar’, as for example, in Un niveau-seuil. What is clear is that a language learner has to acquire both forms and meanings.

5.2.1.4 Phonological competence

involves a knowledge of, and skill in the perception and production of:

• the sound-units (phonemes) of the language and their realisation in particular con- texts (allophones);

• the phonetic features which distinguish phonemes (distinctive features, e.g. voicing, rounding, nasality, plosion);

• the phonetic composition of words (syllable structure, the sequence of phonemes, word stress, word tones);

• sentence phonetics (prosody) • sentence stress and rhythm • intonation;

Users of the Framework may wish to consider and where appropriate state:

• phonetic reduction • vowel reduction • strong and weak forms • assimilation

• elision.