Cover not available
Part of
Speaking in a Second Language
Edited by Rosa Alonso Alonso
[AILA Applied Linguistics Series 17] 2018
► pp. 105–125

Chapter 5
The acquisition of L2 speaking

A dynamic perspective

 | University of Groningen
The complex dynamic systems theory approach to second language development has great explanatory power in accounting for the development of speaking as an emergent process. CDST approaches focus on the process of development, rather than on the products of learning, and often include the learner’s variability over time as an important source of information. In this chapter a CDST perspective is given of speaking in a second language. The individually owned and variable process of speaking development is illustrated with longitudinal speaking data of identical twins as they learn English as a second language in Taiwan. Our observations emphasize the individual nature of the development of speaking in a second language, which has important implications for effective language teaching for L2 speaking.
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • A complex dynamic systems theory account of L2 speaking
  • Complex dynamic subsystems
  • Variability
  • A twin study in speaking development
    • Participants
  • Materials
  • Measures
  • Data analysis
  • Results
    • MLT/spoken
    • VocD/spoken
  • Discussion and conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
  • Appendix
Published online: 12 April 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/aals.17.05low
References (48)
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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, D., Gray, B., & Poonpon, K. (2011). Should we use characteristics of conversation to measure grammatical complexity in L2 writing development? TESOL Quarterly, 45(1), 5–35. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bulté, B. (2013). The development of complexity in second language acquisition: A dynamic systems approach. Unpublished PhD dissertation. University of Brussels.Google Scholar
Caspi, T. (2010). A dynamic perspective on second language development. Groningen: University of Groningen.Google Scholar
Chan, H. (2015). A dynamic approach to the development of lexicon and syntax in a second language. Groningen: University of Groningen.Google Scholar
Chan, H., Verspoor, M., & Vahtrick, L. (2015). Dynamic development in speaking versus writing in identical twins. Language Learning, 65(2), 298–325. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Council of Europe. (2001). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dale, P. S., Harlaar, N., Haworth, C. M., & Plomin, R. (2010). Two by two: A twin study of second-language acquisition. Psychological Science, 21(5), 635–640. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Bot, K., Lowie, W., & Verspoor, M. (2007). A dynamic systems theory approach to second language acquisition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 10(1), 7–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dykstra-Pruim, P. (2003). Speaking, writing, and explicit-rule knowledge: Toward an understanding of how they interrelate. TT –Foreign Language Annals TA -, 36(1), 66–76. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Elman, J. (1995). Language as a dynamical system. In T. van Gelder (Ed.), Mind in motion: Explorations of the dynamics of cognition (pp. 195–225). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Grosjean, F. (2010). Bilingual life and reality. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hayiou-Thomas, M. E. (2008). Genetic and environmental influences on early speech, language and literacy development. Journal of Communication Disorders, 41, 397–408. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Herdina, P., & Jessner, U. (2002). A dynamic model of multilingualism. Perspective of change in psycholinguistics. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hood. (2004). PopTools Version 2.6.2. Canberra, Australia: CSIRO. Retrieved from <[URL]>Google Scholar
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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hunt, K. W. (1970). Do sentences in the second language grow like those in the first? TESOL Quarterly, 4, 195–202. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Larsen-Freeman, D. (1997). Chaos/complexity science and second language acquisition,. Applied Linguistics, 18(2), 141–165. Retrieved from <[URL]> DOI logo
(2006). The emergence of complexity, fluency and accuracy in the oral and written production of five Chinese learners of English. Applied Linguistics, 27, 590–619. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Larsen-Freeman, D., & Cameron, L. (2008). Complex systems and applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
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. 243–268). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of language acquisition, Vol. 2: Second language acquisition (pp. 413–468). New York, NY: Academic Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lowie, W. (2013). The CEFR and the dynamics of second language learning: Trends and challenges. Language Learning in Higher Education, 2(1), 17–34. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lowie, W., Van Dijk, M., Chan, H. P., & Verspoor, M. H. (2017). Finding the key to successful L2 learning in groups and individuals. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching.7(1), 127–148. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lowie, W., Van Dijk, M., Chan, H., & Verspoor, M. (2017b). Finding the key to successful L2 learning in groups and individuals. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 771(7), 127–148. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lu, X. (2012). The relationship of lexical richness to the quality of ESL learners’ oral narratives. Modern Language Journal, 96(2), 190–208. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mackey, A. (1999). Input, interaction and second language development: An empirical study of question formation in ESL. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21(4), 557–587. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Macwhinney, B. (2005). The emergence of linguistic form in time. Connection Science, 17, 191–211. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Malvern, D., Richards, B., Chipere, N., & Durán, P. (2004). Lexical diversity and language development. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
North, B. (2007). The CEFR illustrative descriptor scales. Modern Language Journal, 91, 656–659. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Penris, W., & Verspoor, M. (2017). Academic writing development: A complex, dynamic process. In S. E. Pfenninger & J. Navracsics (Eds.), Future research directions for applied linguistics (pp. 215–242). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pienemann, M. (1998). Language processing and second language development. Processability Theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pine, K. J., Lufkin, N., Kirk, E., & Messer, D. (2007). A microgenetic analysis of the relationship between speech and gesture in children: Evidence for semantic and temporal asynchrony. Language and Cognitive Processes, 22(2), 234–246. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Port, R., & van Gelder, T. (1995). Mind as motion: Exploration in the dynamics of cognition. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, Bradford Books.Google Scholar
Spoelman, M., & Verspoor, M. (2010). Dynamic patterns in the development of accuracy and complexity: A longitudinal case study on the acquisition of Finnish. Applied Linguistics, 31(4), 532–553. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stromswold, K. (2001). The heritability of language: A review and metaanalysis of twin, adoption, and linkage studies. Language, 77(4), 674–723. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2006). Why aren’t identical twins identical? Genetic, prenatal and postnatal factors. Cognition, 101, 333–384. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thelen, E., & Smith, L. B. (1994). A dynamic systems approach to the development of cognition and action. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Van Dijk, M., Verspoor, M. H., & Lowie, W. (2011). Variability and DST. In M. Verspoor, K. De Bot, & W. Lowie (Eds.), A dynamic approach to second language development: Methods and techniques (pp. 55–84). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Geert, P. (1998). A dynamic systems model of basic developmental mechanisms: Piaget, Vygotsky and beyond. Psychological Review, 5, 634–677. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2003). Dynamic systems approaches and modeling of developmental processes. In J. Valsiner & K. J. Conolly (Eds.), Handbook of developmental Psychology (pp. 640–672). London: Sage.Google Scholar
Verspoor, M., Lowie, W., & Van Dijk, M. (2008). Variability in second language development from a dynamic systems perspective. Modern Language Journal, 92(2), 214–232. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Verspoor, M., Schmid, M. S., & Xu, X. (2012). A dynamic usage based perspective on L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(3), 239–263. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Verspoor, M., & Van Dijk, M. (2013). Variability in a dynamic systems approach. In C. A. Chapelle, The encyclopedia of applied linguistics (pp. 2051–6059). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wolfe-Quintero, K., Hae-Young, K., & Inagaki, S. (1998). Second language development in writing: Measures of fluency, accuracy, and complexity. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press.Google Scholar
Wu, J. R. W. (2012). GEPT and English language teaching and testing in Taiwan. Language Assessment Quarterly, 9(1), 11–25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yip, V., & Matthews, S. (2007). The bilingual child: Early development and language contact. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from <[URL]> DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (9)

Cited by nine other publications

Pemberton, Ian
2024. Empirical Research. In Usage-Based Second Language Instruction, ► pp. 159 ff. DOI logo
Pienemann, Manfred, Anke Lenzing & Howard Nicholas
2024. Can dynamical systems theory be applied to second language acquisition? The issues of reductionism and intentionality. Second Language Research 40:4 ► pp. 1009 ff. DOI logo
Yu, Hanjing & Hongying Peng
2024. Developmental dynamics in oral fluency and learner motivation: A dual‐focus approach. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 34:4 ► pp. 1401 ff. DOI logo
Baran-Łucarz, Małgorzata
2023. Personality as a Correlate of Accentedness: The Case of Formal Setting Without Pronunciation-Focused Instruction. Research in Language 21:4 ► pp. 377 ff. DOI logo
Wang, Xiaochen, Fei Sun, Qikai Wang & Xinyu Li
2022. Motivation and affordance: A study of graduate students majoring in translation in China. Frontiers in Education 7 DOI logo
Chang, Pengyun & Lawrence Jun Zhang
2021. A CDST Perspective on Variability in Foreign Language Learners’ Listening Development. Frontiers in Psychology 12 DOI logo
de Jong, Nivja H.
2020. Teaching Speaking. In The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics, ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
van Batenburg, Eline, Ron Oostdam, Amos van Gelderen, Ruben Fukkink & Nivja de Jong
2020. The effects of instructional focus and task type on pre-vocational learners’ ability in EFL oral interaction. ITL - International Journal of Applied Linguistics 171:2 ► pp. 153 ff. DOI logo
Wang, Yu & Shoucun Tao
2020. Chapter 3. The dynamic co-development of linguistic and discourse-semantic complexity in advanced L2 writing. In Complex Dynamic Systems Theory and L2 Writing Development [Language Learning & Language Teaching, 54], ► pp. 49 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 9 november 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.