ABSTRACT
Chomsky’s postulated dichotomy between general linguistic ability and individual language use, which is connected to de Saussure’s distinction langue vs parole. Competence is that knowledge about the native language which is acquired along with the language used by an ideal speaker/listener of a homogeneous speech community (i.e. free from dialectal and sociolectal variations). Due to an infinite inventory of elements (sounds, words) and syntactic rules, the speaker can theoretically produce and understand an infinite number of utterances. Performance refers not only to this, but also to the ability of the speaker to pass judgment on the grammaticality of sentences, on ambiguity, and paraphrases. The goal of transformational grammar is to formulate a grammar that illustrates as truly as possible the ability of a speaker’s competence, and at the same time to offer a hypothesis about language acquisition. Linguistic theories based on the notion of competence have been reproached for being too idealistic, which has led to a broadening of the original concept to mean communicative competence. Whereas the terms ‘performance’ (Chomsky) and ‘parole’ (de Saussure) can be used almost interchangeably, their counterparts ‘competence’ and ‘langue’ are quite different from each other. ‘Langue’ is a static system of signs, whereas competence is understood as a dynamic concept, as a mechanism that will generate language endlessly.
