By Layth Muthana and Khulood

Unlike some branches of theoretical linguistics which are concerned with language as an abstract object, applied linguistics must take into consideration not only the nature of language but the nature of the particular world in which language is used, the beliefs, social institutions, and culture of its users, and how these influence language use. Theoretical linguistics provides a growing body of scientific knowledge. It tries to postulate theories concerning the phenomenon of language in general; it does this through the scientific investigation of language. Un like theoretical linguistics, and since its emergence as a field of study, applied linguistics has been associated with language teaching and learning. Language teaching is viewed as an activity rather than a scientific theoretical study; the activity of language teaching cannot be stimulated on a computer, modeled mathematically, or reduced to a systematic set of logically related procedures, or an algorithm. Hence applied linguistics is an activity. It makes use of the findings of theoretical studies. The applied linguist is a consumer, or user, not a producer, of theories. Throughout its history, language teaching has been viewed from two perspectives and approaches: the traditional approach and the modern approach. What characterized the traditional language teaching, perhaps the most convincing criticism, is that it concentrated on the notion of correctness, the rules of grammar, its limited objectives, and most importantly is that it lacked the sociological dimension of language. The traditional approach assumed that language was a linguistic linguistic concept. Little thought seems to have been given to the notion of appropriateness, to the way that language behavior is responsive to different social situations. In other words, the methods of the traditional approach are no longer appropriate to new sets of demands and expectations. Thus, when considering the notions of appropriate or inappropriate use of language, we are taking language of language as a social institution, a body of socially conditioned or culturally determined ways of behaving. What is incorrect or inappropriate is simply that which is not in conformity with the shared norms of a particular group. In language teaching, the learner is prepared to participate in some other social group, some language community other than his own, to play a part or fulfill a role in that community. Unacceptable or inappropriate language prevents him from interacting or communicating satisfactorily with the other members of that community; he may fail to achieve his ends, he may fail to
1

communicate or be misunderstood, he may give offence or make himself ridiculous. Hence , the modern language teaching adopts a more social approach to language and it is concerned with the problems of language communicative function in different social situation. Thus, it emphasizes the notion of presenting language in situation, in dialogue form rather than isolated exemplificatory sentences; in the use of audio-visual materials and in the emphasis on natural linguistic examples. Language in this second approach is a social event. It can fully be described only if we know all about the people who are involved in it, their personalities, their beliefs, attitudes, knowledge of the world, their relationships to each other, their social status what activity they are engaged in, why they are talking at all, what has gone before, linguistically and non-linguistically and what happens after. Therefore, the modern approach to language teaching and learning has given rise to the communicative method, which became the mainstream approach to language teaching in the last decades of the twentieth century. It focuses on the essential nature of language as communication. Accordingly, knowledge of a language is far more than knowledge of the grammar of individual sentences. Instead, knowing a language means knowing how to communicate in the language; it involves acquiring communicative competence. Speakers need knowledge not only of what is grammatically possible but also of what is appropriate and typically done. The concept of communicative competence has been appropriated for language teaching purposes in a series of evolutionary reformulations so as to include grammatical, pragmatic, sociolinguistic, discourse, and strategic competences, all of which are in effect discourse competences, since they account for the ability of members of speech communities to put language to use. When combined with speech act theory, the emphasis on communicative competence found application in the functional approach of the 1970s and 1980s in Europe. In this approach, communication was boiled down to discrete, teachable speech acts, and the syllabus was constructed around communicative functions such as requesting, asking permission, giving opinions, complaining, etc. Another important issue is the interaction/learning issue that in the language classroom acts of communication using the target language are not merely the hoped for outcome of learning but an essential means to successful language acquisition. In their interactions with their peers and with their teachers, learners experience communication breakdowns which prompt negotiation of meaning, accomplished through clarification requests, confirmation checks, and requests for repetition. The attention of researchers thus turns to how questioning is conducted; how and by whom turn-taking is controlled; how tasks are designed in terms of the nature of
2

the interactional demands they make on the learners and how learners engage with them; and how feedback is given in response to learner output. All of these are discourse issues (as well as pedagogic ones), to the analysis of which a variety of approaches, including conversational analysis, ethnography, and genre analysis, can contribute. In other words, language is learned through communication and a negotiation of meaning between interlocutors; therefore, the syllabus is to be organized to elicit student production of language for communicative purposes. Classroom activities may involve role-plays of situations that students might find themselves in, discussion of topics that students want to communicate about, or completion of tasks requiring students to share information and negotiate meaning. A communicative orientation involves a consideration of a whole host of issues: how discourse is processed, how interaction is conducted, learning styles and strategies, developmental patterns of language acquisition, the role of learner and teacher. Applied linguists have turned their attention in recent years to include the findings of branches of linguistics such as sociolinguistics, pragmatics, discourse analysis and conversational analysis, psycholinguistics in the second/foreign language teaching and learning activity.