A dynamic view as a complementary perspective

Abstract

Theory building is a dynamic process. Theories develop and grow, they are dependent on initial conditions, social interactions, variation, and they are stable for some time only to move on to the next phase. They can develop gradually, but a non-linear pattern is more common. Most importantly, theories develop over time. Theories are typically based on shared cognitions and they are situated. Written descriptions by definition reflect versions of the theory that are outdated the moment they are in print, though some of the core assumptions may be more stable than other, more peripheral ones. All of this very much applies to the present discussion of our paper on a DST approach to SLA. Inevitably, we, and probably most of the commentators, will already have moved on in our thinking about DST and SLA by the time this comes into print. In particular with new approaches, we will see a great deal of variability: wild ideas flourish and the links between grand theoretical notions and empirical database to support them tend to be out of balance. That may be seen as a weakness, but it probably is an inevitable developmental stage in building a new theory, or, as in this case, the application from a theory developed in other fields to SLA.

Exploring the Dynamic Long‐Term Interaction Between Cognitive and Psychosocial Resources in Adult Second Language Development at Varying Proficiency

“…It could be that at higher proficiency, cognitive and motivational resources are more likely to function as "higher-order combinations of different attributes-or trait complexes-that act as integrated wholes" (Dörnyei, 2010a, p. 248), a concept that builds on work by cognitive psychologists (e.g., Ackerman, 2003) and L2 researchers (e.g., Robinson, 2001Robinson, , 2002Robinson, , 2007. On the other hand, fluctuating relationships among connected growers at low proficiency may signal a transitional phase (i.e., system reorganization) in the developing system (de Bot, Lowie, & Verspoor, 2007b) as transitional stages will be marked by a greater deal of variation (Verspoor et al, 2008, p. 219).…”

A dialectical reading of Dynamic Systems Theory

“…While I register qualified affinities with some aspects of the received reading of the DST perspective in L2 research (de Bot, 2008;de Bot, Lowie, & Verspoor, 2007a, 2007bLarsen-Freeman, 2011, 2012a, 2012b, 2013aCameron & Larsen-Freeman, 2007;Verspoor, de Bot, & Lowie, 2011, among others), here labeled the contextual DST, the proposed dialectical approach to DST is counterposed with the extant reading of DST on various counts. Most broadly, the guiding concern in the present argument is, nonetheless, to refine and cast some complementary light on the 'use-equals-L2 system' reading of DST in L2 studies through a scientific critique rather than to take precedence over contextual DST en bloc.…”

“…An open question to be addressed by contextual DST is how it is possible to explain th e d e v el opm en tal tr aj e c tor y of th e tem p or al ev ol u ti on an d r ev ol u ti on of a ti m edependent (i.e., dynamic) system such as the L2 solely by equating language use and language change (e.g., de Bot et al, 2007b). Importantly, if the developmental time of the L2 system is regarded as a montage of discrete real-time points, by implication, it seems to contradict the dynamicity (i.e., time-dependency) of the L2 system.…”

Learning an L2 and L3 at the same time: help or hinder?

“…As an inherent property of a dynamic system, variability provides insight into the developmental process (de Bot et al, 2007;Lowie & Verspoor, 2019;Spoelman & Verspoor 2010;van Geert & van Dijk, 2002). From a behavioural science view, variability is a result of both the external factors and the self-organisation within the system itself, and can be seen as a predictor of development (de Weerth et al, 1999).…”