Keywords
second language development
complex dynamic systems
variability process study
How to Cite
Number of views: 1337
Number of downloads: 884
Abstract
A large body studies into individual differences in second language learning has shown that success in second language learning is strongly affected by a set of relevant learner characteristics ranging from the age of onset to motivation, aptitude, and personality. Most studies have concentrated on a limited number of learner characteristics and have argued for the relative importance of some of these factors. Clearly, some learners are more successful than others, and it is tempting to try to find the factor or combination of factors that can crack the code to success. However, isolating one or several global individual characteristics can only give a partial explanation of success in second language learning. The limitation of this approach is that it only reflects on rather general personality characteristics of learners at one point in time, while both language development and the factors affecting it are instances of complex dynamic processes that develop over time. Factors that have been labelled as “individual differences” as well as the development of proficiency are characterized by nonlinear relationships in the time domain, due to which the rate of success cannot be simply deduced from a combination of factors. Moreover, in complex dynamic systems theory (CDST) literature it has been argued that a generalization about the interaction of variables across individuals is not warranted when we acknowledge that language development is essentially an individual process (Molenaar, 2015). In this paper, the viability of these generalizations is investigated by exploring the L2 development over time for two identical twins in Taiwan who can be expected to be highly similar in all respects, from their environment to their level of English proficiency, to their exposure to English, and to their individual differences. In spite of the striking similarities between these learners, the development of their L2 English over time was very different. Developmental patterns for spoken and written language even showed opposite tendencies. These observations underline the individual nature of the process of second language development.References
Bardovi-Harlig, K., & Bofman, T. (1989). Attainment of syntactic and morphological accuracy by advanced language learners. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 11(1), 17-34.
Boo, Z., Dornyei, Z., & Ryan S. (2015). L2 motivation research 2005-2014: Understanding a publication surge and a changing landscape. System, 55, 145-157.
Bulté, B. (2013). The development of complexity in second language acquisition: A dynamic systems approach (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Brussels, Belgium.
Byrnes, H. (2009). Emergent L2 German writing ability in a curricular context: A longitudinal study of grammatical metaphor. Linguistics and Education, 20(1), 50-66.
Catell, R. B. (1952). The three basic factor-analytic designs: Their interrelations and derivatives. Psychological Bulletin, 49, 499-520.
Caspi, T. (2010). A dynamic perspective on second language development (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Groningen, the Netherlands.
Chan, H. P., Lowie, W., & De Bot, K. (2014). A case study of lexical development of writing and speaking in identical twins. In J. Gao, M. Guérin, V. Allegranzi, M. Rivière, L. Sauwala, C. Simon, & L. Xue (Eds.), Actes des 16èmes Rencontres Jeunes Chercheurs en Sciences du Langage: Modèles et modélisation dans les sciences du langage (pp. 54-65). Paris: HAL-SHS.
Chan, H. P., Verspoor, M., & Vahtrick, L. (2015). Dynamic development in speaking versus writing in identical twins. Language Learning, 65(2), 298-325.
Coyle, T. R., & Björlund, D. F. (1997). Age differences in, and consequences of, multiple- and variable-strategy use on a multitrial sort-recall task. Developmental Psychology, 33, 372-380.
Cunnings, I. (2012). An overview of mixed-effects statistical models for second language researchers. Second Language Research, 28, 369-382. doi:10.1177/ 026765831244365
Dörnyei, Z. (2009). Individual differences: Interplay of learner characteristics and learning environment. Language Learning, 59(Suppl. 1), 230-248.
Dörnyei, Z. (2010). The relationship between language aptitude and language learning motivation: Individual differences from a dynamic systems perspective. In E. Macaro (Ed.), The continuum companion to second language acquisition (pp. 247-267). London: Continuum.
Dörnyei, Z., & Ryan, S. (2015). The psychology of the language learner revisited. New York: Routledge.
Gardner, R. C., Tremblay, P. F., & Masgoret, A. M. (1997). Towards a full model of second language learning: An empirical investigation. Modern Language Journal, 81(3), 344-362.
Hayiou-Thomas, M. E. (2008). Genetic and environmental influences on early speech, language and literacy development. Journal of Communication Disorders, 41, 397-408.
Hood, G. M. (2004). PopTools Version 2.6.2 [Software]. Canberra: CSIRO. Retrieved from http://www.cse.csiro.au/poptools
Hosenfeld, B., Van der Maas, H. L. J., & Van den Boom, D. C. (1997). Indicators of discontinuous change in the development of analogical reasoning. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 64, 367-395.
Hunt, K. W. (1970). Recent measures in syntactic development. In M. Lester (Ed.), Reading in applied transformational grammar (pp. 179-192). Nueva York: Holt, Rinehart and Wiston.
Kozaki, Y., & Ross, S. J. (2011). Contextual dynamics in foreign language learning motivation. Language Learning, 61, 1328-1354.
Jiang, Y., & Dewaele, J. (2015). What lies bubbling beneath the surface? A longitudinal perspective on fluctuations of ideal and ought-to L2 self among Chinese learners of English. IRAL: International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 53(3), 331-354.
Lee, K., & Karmiloff-Smith, A. (2002). Macro- and microdevelopmental research: Assumptions, research strategies, constraints and utilities. In N. Granott & J. Parziale (Eds.), Microdevelopment: Transition processes in development and learning (pp. 243-265). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Linck, J. A., & Cunnings, I. (2015). The utility and application of mixed-effects models in second language research. Language Learning, 65, 185-207. doi: 10.1111/lang.12117
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2006). The emergence of complexity, fluency, and accuracy in the oral and written production of five Chinese learners of English. Applied Linguistics, 27(4), 590-619.
Lu, X. (2010). Automatic analysis of syntactic complexity in second language writing. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 15, 474-496.
MacWhinney, B. (2000). The CHILDES Project: Tools for Analyzing Talk (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Malvern, D. D., Richards, B. J., Chipere, N., & Purán, P. (2004). Lexical diversity and language development. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Masgoret, A. M., & Gardner, R. C. (2003). Attitudes, motivation, and second language learning: A meta-analysis of studies conducted by Gardner and associates. Language Learning, 53, 167-210.
Murakami, A. (2013). Individual variation and the role of L1 in the L2 development of English grammatical morphemes: Insights from learner corpora (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Cambridge University, UK.
Molenaar, P. C. M. (2015). On the relation between person-oriented and subject-specific approaches. Journal for Person-Oriented Research, 1(1-2), 34-41.
Plomin, R., DeFries, J. C., McClearn, G. E., & McGuffin, P. (2008). Behavior genetics (5th ed.). New York: Worth.
Segal, N. L. (2010). Twins: The finest natural experiment. Personality and Individual Differences, 49, 317-323.
Siegler, R. S. (2006). Microgenetic analyses of learning. In D. Kuhn & R. S. Siegler (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology, volume 2: Cognition, perception, and language (6th ed.) (pp. 464-510). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Slevc, R., & Miyake, A. (2006). Individual differences in second-language proficiency: Does musical ability matter? Psychological Science, 17(8), 675-681.
Stromswold, K. (2006). Why aren't identical twins identical? Genetic, prenatal and postnatal factors. Cognition, 101, 333-384.
Thelen, E., & Smith, L. B. (1994). A dynamic systems approach to the development of cognition and action. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Tilma, C. (2014). The dynamics of foreign versus second language development in Finnish writing (University of Groningen/University of Jÿvaskyla dissertation). Jÿvaskyla: University of Jÿvaskyla.
Todman, J., & Dugard, P. (2001). Single-case and small-n experimental designs: A practical guide to randomization tests. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Tremblay, A., Derwing, B., Libben, G., & Westbury, C. (2011). Processing advantages of lexical bundles: Evidence from self-paced reading and sentence recall tasks. Language Learning, 61, 569-613.
Van Geert, P. (2008). The dynamic systems approach in the study of L1 and L2 acquisition: An introduction. Modern Language Journal, 25, 340-375.
Van Geert, P. (2011). The contribution of complex dynamic systems to development. Child Development Perspectives, 5, 4, 273-278.
Verspoor, M., Lowie, W., & Van Dijk, M. (2008). Variability in second language development from a dynamic systems perspective. Modern Language Journal, 92(2), 214-231.
Vyatkina, N. (2012). The development of second language writing complexity in groups and individuals: A longitudinal learner corpus study. The Modern Language Journal, 96(4), 576-598.
Wanninge, F., Dörnyei, Z., & De Bot, K. (2014). Motivational dynamics in language learning: Change, stability, and context. The Modern Language Journal, 98(3), 704-723.
Wu, J. R. W. (2012). GEPT and English language teaching and testing in Taiwan. Language Assessment Quarterly, 9(1), 11-25. doi: 10.1080/15434303.2011.553251
License
1.1 The Author hereby warrants that he/she is the owner of all the copyright and other intellectual property rights in the Work and that, within the scope of the present Agreement, the paper does not infringe the legal rights of another person. The owner of the copyright work also warrants that he/she is the sole and original creator thereof and that is not bound by any legal constraints in regard to the use or sale of the work.
1.2. The Publisher warrants that is the owner of the PRESSto platform for open access journals, hereinafter referred to as the PRESSto Platform.
2. The Author grants the Publisher non-exclusive and free of charge license to unlimited use worldwide over an unspecified period of time in the following areas of exploitation:
2.1. production of multiple copies of the Work produced according to the specific application of a given technology, including printing, reproduction of graphics through mechanical or electrical means (reprography) and digital technology;
2.2. marketing authorisation, loan or lease of the original or copies thereof;
2.3. public performance, public performance in the broadcast, video screening, media enhancements as well as broadcasting and rebroadcasting, made available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them;
2.4. inclusion of the Work into a collective work (i.e. with a number of contributions);
2.5. inclusion of the Work in the electronic version to be offered on an electronic platform, or any other conceivable introduction of the Work in its electronic version to the Internet;
2.6. dissemination of electronic versions of the Work in its electronic version online, in a collective work or independently;
2.7. making the Work in the electronic version available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, in particular by making it accessible via the Internet, Intranet, Extranet;
2.8. making the Work available according to appropriate license pattern Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) as well as another language version of this license or any later version published by Creative Commons.
3. The Author grants the Publisher permission to reproduce a single copy (print or download) and royalty-free use and disposal of rights to compilations of the Work and these compilations.
4. The Author grants the Publisher permission to send metadata files related to the Work, including to commercial and non-commercial journal-indexing databases.
5. The Author represents that, on the basis of the license granted in the present Agreement, the Publisher is entitled and obliged to:
5.1. allow third parties to obtain further licenses (sublicenses) to the Work and to other materials, including derivatives thereof or compilations made, based on or including the Work, whereas the provisions of such sub-licenses will be the same as with the Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) Creative Commons sub-license or another language version of this license, or any later version of this license published by Creative Commons;
5.2. make the Work available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, without any technological constraints;
5.3. appropriately inform members of the public to whom the Work is to be made available about sublicenses in such a way as to ensure that all parties are properly informed (appropriate informing messages).
6. Because of the royalty-free provision of services of the Author (resulting from the scope of obligations stipulated in the present Agreement), the Author shall not be entitled to any author’s fee due and payable on the part of the Publisher (no fee or royalty is payable by the Publisher to the Author).
7.1. In the case of third party claims or actions for indemnity against the Publisher owing to any infractions related to any form of infringement of intellectual property rights protection, including copyright infringements, the Author is obliged to take all possible measures necessary to protect against these claims and, when as a result of legal action, the Publisher, or any third party licensed by the Publisher to use the Work, will have to abandon using the Work in its entirety or in part or, following a court ruling in a legal challenge, to pay damages to a third party, whatever the legal basis
7.2. The Author will immediately inform the Publisher about any damage claims related to intellectual property infringements, including the author’s proprietary rights pertaining to a copyrighted work, filed against the Author. of liability, the Author is obliged to redress the damage resulting from claims made by third party, including costs and expenditures incurred in the process.
7.3. To all matters not settled herein provisions of the Polish Civil Code and the Polish Copyright and Related Rights Act shall apply.