url?sa=t&source=web&cd=13&ved=0CC4QFjACOAo&url=http://livelongday.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/kumaraposmethod

LANGUAGE: CONCEPTS AND PRECEPTS 7guistic competence, subsumes phonological, syntactic, and semantic subsystems.That is why the unconscious possession of this abstract linguisticcompetence helps native speakers of a language to discriminate well-formedsentences from ill-formed word-sequences as well as well-formed sentencesthat make sense from those that do not (see the previously given examples).In the same way, native speakers of English can also identify the ambiguityin sentences likeVisiting mother-in-law can be boring.or tell who the agent is in structurally identical pairs likeJohn is easy to please.John is eager to please.In other words, linguistic competence entails a semantic component thatindicates the intrinsic meaning of sentences. This intrinsic meaning is semanticmeaning and should not be confused with pragmatic meaning,which takes into consideration actual language use, that is, the speaker–hearer’s ability to use utterances that are deemed appropriate in a particularcommunicative situation. As Chomsky clarifies, the notion of competencedoes not include actual language use: “The term ‘competence’ enteredthe technical literature in an effort to avoid the slew of problemsrelating to ‘knowledge,’ but it is misleading in that it suggests ‘ability’—anassociation I would like to sever” (Chomsky, 1980, p. 59).By not considering the pragmatic aspect of language use in formulatinghis theory of linguistic competence, Chomsky is in no way dismissing its importance.For purposes of “enquiry and exposition,” he considers it fit “todistinguish ‘grammatical competence’ from ‘pragmatic competence,’ restrictingthe first to the knowledge of form and meaning and the second toknowledge of conditions and manner of appropriate use . . .” (Chomsky,1980, p. 224). In other words, he is interested in looking at human languageas a cognitive psychological mechanism and not as a communicativetool for social interaction. Those who do treat language as a vehicle forcommunication find it absolutely necessary to go beyond language as systemand seriously consider the nature of language as discourse.1.1.2. Language as DiscourseIn the field of linguistics, the term discourse is used to refer generally to “aninstance of spoken or written language that has describable internal relationshipsof form and meaning (e.g., words, structures, cohesion) that relatecoherently to an external communicative function or purpose and a