English for native speakers is compared and contrasted with English for non-native speakers by examining the influence of Moffett's (1968) structural curriculum for native speakers and the notional functional syllabus approach for second language learners. Both approaches are more rhetorical and less grammatical then the approaches that preceded them. The structural curriculum posits that the fundamental structure of discourse is a set of relations between sender, receiver, and message. In the notional functional syllabus, the learning units are not situations but semantic or notional categories such as time; space; and the sentential case relations of agent, initiator, and object. Structural curriculum strives to mirror the psychological growth of the learner while notional-functional syllabi do not. The former approach also attempts to provide general linguistic skills (usually for children) while the latter works best with adults whose language needs can be precisely determined. It is concluded that teachers of both native speakers and of second language speakers can benefit from using certain aspects of the two methodologies. The structural curriculum approach can readily be applied to teaching the kind of communicative competence English as a second language progjrams strive for. Notional functional syllabi seem best suited to assist in the teaching of native speakers by integrating the study of grammar and the study of writing. (RW)