Variability and Variation in Second Language Acquisition Orders: A Dynamic Reevaluation

Abstract

The traditional morpheme order studies in second language acquisition have tried to demonstrate the existence of a fixed order of acquisition of English morphemes, regardless of the second language learner's background. Such orders have been taken as evidence of the preprogrammed nature of language acquisition. This article argues for a process‐based, dynamic explanation of development, in which each developmental step is based on the dynamic interaction of all processes involved. Due to the complexity of these interactions, the developmental process cannot be predetermined and fixed. Although stages of development like the acquisition order of morphemes are commonly observed as a grand sweep effect at the group level, these stages may be meaningless at the level of the individual language learner. This paradox shows we can only make the observations that our method allows us. If we are interested in grand sweep effects that may be generalizable to large populations of learners, we will have to carry out group studies with representative samples that can be analyzed using Gaussian statistics based on the normal distribution. But if we are interested in how an individual learner progresses over time as a result of changing variables in a changing context, we will have to conduct longitudinal studies and use nonlinear methods of analysis.

Syntactic complexity in L2 writing: Individual pathways and emerging group trends

“…diversity, compositionality, sophistication) of linguistic complexity. Rather, like most instances of natural development, it is characterized by variability and change (Lowie & Verspoor, ; Verspoor & Van Dijk, ). The relationship between different dimensions and layers of complexity can be both supportive and competitive (complexity trade‐offs), and their correlation can change over time.…”

Language Learning Motivation as a Complex Dynamic System: A Global Perspective of Truth, Control, and Value

“…These adaptive interactions—termed coordination dynamics—shed light on how functionally significant patterns of coordinated behavior emerge from initial states, persist in context, and adapt or change through time (Jirsa & Kelso, ). While the sustained adaptation of systems is capable of producing a rich repertoire of behaviors (Lowie & Verspoor, , ), it also illustrates how simplicity arises from the adaptive behavior of interrelated and interacting components. Coordination dynamics are precisely what enables learners to accommodate such waxing and waning influences over time (Lowie & Verspoor, ).…”

“…While the sustained adaptation of systems is capable of producing a rich repertoire of behaviors (Lowie & Verspoor, , ), it also illustrates how simplicity arises from the adaptive behavior of interrelated and interacting components. Coordination dynamics are precisely what enables learners to accommodate such waxing and waning influences over time (Lowie & Verspoor, ). Using process tracing, in this study our aim was to uncover key motivational trajectories and processes of development and highlight the unique coordination dynamics that lead to salient motivational outcomes for these language learners.…”

“…In the conclusion to the first volume devoted to examining motivational dynamics in the field, MacIntyre, Dörnyei, and Henry () stated that “motivation has adaptive and self‐organizing properties, with feedback loops that continuously integrate internal and external contexts and act as reinforcing or counteracting forces, creating nonlinear changes in levels of motivated behavior” (p. 423). These principles are echoed by scholarship on language development and in learning more generally (e.g., Lowie & Verspoor, ; van Geert, ; van Geert & Steenbeek, ) and signal a growing momentum for a novel reorientation to the way in which applied linguistics scholars see, investigate, and intervene in the language learning process.…”

Emergentism: wide ranging theoretical framework or just one more meta-theory?

“…In those cases, some variability will always occur in some of the subsystems associated with language development, the amount of variability may not be sufficient to lead to developmental change. Due to the observation that variability is a necessary condition for change to take place, variability has been labelled as the « motor of change » (Lowie & Verspoor, 2015). Second, variability is the result of the self-organizing principle that is characteristic of any dynamic system due to the interaction of subsystems.…”