On language, culture, and controversies

On Language Learner Agency: A Complex Dynamic Systems Theory Perspective

“…Various theories have been invoked to account for agency: performativity theory (e.g., Miller, ), sociocultural theory (e.g., Arievitch, ; García, ), sociocognitive theory (e.g., Dufva & Aro, ); critical realism (e.g., Block, ; Bouchard, ), and others. Each makes its contribution, and I do not wish to argue for a synthesis nor do I want to encourage a competition.…”

“…However, language is not a closed system (see Ortega, , this issue), and there is, in fact, no linguistic basis for distinguishing a linguistic innovation from an error (Larsen–Freeman, ) because both are contingent upon the speakers’ perception of, and acting on, the affordances in the context to create meaning and to position oneself in a manner one wishes, engaging in the agentive process of audience design by tailoring their messages to interlocutors and other audiences (Larsen–Freeman, ; LaScotte & Tarone, , this issue). Knowing this may make it possible to “disrupt understandings” of what constitutes an error, and become more accepting of what is essentially a creative process (Bouchard, ; Elder–Vass, ).…”

“…And reducing each to merely a manifestation of the other ( …) necessarily results in a theory which is unable to capture the complex relations between them. (p. 11) COMPLEX DYNAMIC SYSTEMS THEORY AND AGENCY Various theories have been invoked to account for agency: performativity theory (e.g., Miller, 2014), sociocultural theory (e.g., Arievitch, 2017;García, 2014), sociocognitive theory (e.g., Dufva & Aro, 2015); critical realism (e.g., Block, 2015;Bouchard, 2018), and others. Each makes its contribution, and I do not wish to argue for a synthesis nor do I want to encourage a competition.…”

Immaterial engagement: human agency and the cognitive ecology of the internet

“…However, language is not a closed system (see Ortega, 2019, this issue), and there is, in fact, no linguistic basis for distinguishing a linguistic innovation from an error (Larsen-Freeman, 2016) because both are contingent upon the speakers' perception of, and acting on, the affordances in the context to create meaning and to position oneself in a manner one wishes, engaging in the agentive process of audience design by tailoring their messages to interlocutors and other audiences (LaScotte & Tarone, 2019, this issue;Larsen-Freeman, 2019). Knowing this may make it possible to -disrupt understandings‖ of what constitutes an error, and become more accepting of what is essentially a creative process (Bouchard, 2018;Elder-Vass, 2014).…”