Chapter published in:
Complexity Theory and Language Development: In celebration of Diane Larsen-Freeman
Edited by Lourdes Ortega and ZhaoHong Han
[Language Learning & Language Teaching 48] 2017
► pp. 209231


Abramowicz, M., & Kluzniak, W.
(2005) Epicyclic frequencies derived from the effective potential: simple and practical formulae. Astrophysics and Space Science, 300(1–3), 127–136.Google Scholar
Andersen, R.
(1993) Four operating principles and input distribution as explanations for underdeveloped and mature morphological systems. In K. Hyltenstam & A. Viberg (Eds.), Progression and regression in language (pp. 309–339). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K., & Hartford, B.
(1996) Input in institutional settings. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 171–188. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Birdsong, D.
(1992) Ultimate attainment in second language acquisition. Language, 68(4), 706–755. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2004) Second language acquisition and ultimate attainment. In A. Davies & C. Elder (Eds.), The handbook of applied linguistics (pp. 82–105). Malden, MA: Blackwell. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bley-Vroman, R.
(1989) What is the logical problem of foreign language learning. In S. Gass & J. Schachter (Eds.), Linguistic perspectives on second language acquisition (pp. 1–68). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Carroll, S.
(2000) Input and evidence: The raw material of second language acquisition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Cilliers, P.
(2005) Knowledge, limits and boundaries. Futures, 37, 605–613. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
de Bot, K.
(2008) Second language development as dynamic process. Modern Language Journal, 79, 505–518.Google Scholar
DeKeyser, R. M.
(2000) The robustness of critical period effects in second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22, 499–533.Google Scholar
Dörnyei, Z.
(2009) Individual differences: Interplay of learner characteristics and learning environment. In N. C. Ellis & D. Larsen-Freeman (Eds.), Language as a complex adaptive system (pp. 230–248). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Dörnyei, Z., & Skehan, P.
(2003) Individual differences in second language learning. In C. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 589–630). Malden, MA: Blackwell. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N. C.
(2006) Language acquisition as rational contingency learning. Applied Linguistics, 27(1), 1–24. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gass, S.
(1997) Input, interaction, and the second language learner. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Gass, S. M., & Madden, C.
(Eds.) (1985) Input in second language acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Grabe, W., & Stoller, F.
(2000) Reading and vocabulary development in a second language. In J. Coady & T. Huckin (Eds.), Second language vocabulary acquisition (pp. 98–122). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gregg, K.
(1996) The logical and developmental problems of second language acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 49–81). New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Haines, S.
(2011) Systems thinking: The new frontier – Discovering simplicity in an age of complexity. Chula Vista, CA: Systems Thinking Press.Google Scholar
Han, Z-H.
(2010) Grammatical morpheme inadequacy as a function of linguistic relativity: A longitudinal study. In Han, Z-H and Cadierno, T. (Eds.), Linguistic relativity in second language acquisition: Thinking for speaking. (pp. 154–182). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Han, Z. -H.
(2014) From Julie to Wes to Alberto: Revisiting the construct of fossilization. In Z. -H. Han & E. Tarone (Eds.), Interlanguage: Forty years later (pp. 47–74). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hayles, N.
(1991) Chaos and order: Complex dynamics in literature and science. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Hulstijn, J. H.
(2012) Is the second language acquisition discipline disintegrating? Language Teaching, 46, 511–517. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hyltenstam, K., & Abrahamsson, N.
(2003) Maturational constraints in SLA. In C. Doughty & M. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 539–588). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jarvis, S., & Odlin, T.
(2000) Morphological type, spatial reference, and language transfer. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22(22), 535–556. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, J., & Newport, E.
(1989) Critical period effects in second language learning: The influence of maturational state on the acquisition of ESL. Cognitive Psychology, 21, 60–99. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jordan, G.
(2004) Explanatory adequacy and theories of SLA. Applied Linguistics, 25(4), 234–238. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kellerman, E.
(1995) Age before beauty: Johnson and Newport revisited. In L. Eubank, L. Selinker & M. Sharwood Smith (Eds.), The current state of interlanguage: Studies in honor of William Rutherford (1995) (pp. 219–231). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Krashen, S.
(1985) The input hypothesis. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Lardiere, D.
(2007) Ultimate attainment in second language acquisition: A case study. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Larsen Freeman, D.
(1976) An explanation for the morpheme acquisition order of second language learners. Language Learning, 26, 125–134. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Larsen-Freeman, D.
(1997) Chaos/complexity science and second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 18, 141–165. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lee, J.
(2000) Five types of input and the various relationships between form and meaning. In J. Lee & A. Valdman (Eds.), Form and meaning: Multiple perspectives (pp. 25–42). Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.Google Scholar
Long, M.
(1996) The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413–468). New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Long, M. H.
(1990) The least a second language acquisition theory needs to explain. TESOL Quarterly, 24, 649–666. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Long, M.
(1993) Assessment strategies for second language acquisition theories. Applied Linguistics, 14(3), 225–249. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1997, May). Fossilization: Rigor mortis in living linguistic systems? Paper presented at the EUROSLA 97, Universitat Pompeu, Fabra, Barcelona.
(2014) Second language acquisition and task-based language teaching. New York, NY: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Montrul, S.
(2014) Interlanguage, transfer and fossilization: Beyond second language acquisition. In Z. -H. Han & E. Tarone (Eds.), Interlanguage: Forty years later (pp. 75–104). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Overton, W. F.
(2007) A coherent metatheory for dynamic systems: Relational organicism-contextualism. Human Development, 50, 154–159. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pinker, S.
(1994) The language instinct. New York: W. Morrow. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Piske, T., & Young-Scholten, M.
(Eds.) (2008) Input matters in SLA. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Ringbom, H., & Jarvis, S.
(2009) The importance of cross-linguistic similarity in foreign language learning. In M. H. Long & C. Doughty (Eds.), The handbook of language teaching (pp. 106–118). Malden, MA: Blackwell. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, P.
(2001) Task complexity, cognitive resources, and syllabus design: A triadic framework for investigating task influences on SLA. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 287–318). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2007) Aptitudes, abilities, contexts, and practice. In R. DeKeyser (Ed.), Practice in second language learning: Perspectives from linguistic and cognitive psychology (pp. 256–286). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schachter, J.
(1996) Learning and triggering in adult L2 acquisition. In G. Brown, K. Malmkjaer & J. Williams (Eds.), Performance and competence in SLA (pp. 70–88). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Schmid, M. S., Gilbers, S., & Nota, A.
(2014) Ultimate attainment in late second language acquisition: Phonetic and grammatical challenges in advanced Dutch-English bilingualism. Second Language Research, 30(2), 129–157. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, B.
(1998) The second language instinct. Lingua, 156, 133–160. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Selinker, L.
(1972) Interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 10(2), 209–231.Google Scholar
(1985) Attempting comprehensive and comparative empirical research in second language acquisition: A review of second language acquisition by adult immigrants: a field manual. Part one. Language Learning, 35(4), 567–584. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Selinker, L., & Lakshmanan, U.
(1992) Language transfer and fossilization: The multiple effects principle. In S. Gass & L. Selinker (Eds.), Language transfer in language learning (pp. 190–216). Philadelphia: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sharwood Smith, M.
(1991) Speaking to many minds: on the relevance of different types of language information for the L2 learner. Second Language Research, 7, 118–132. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Skehan, P.
(2015) Foreign language aptitude and its relationship with grammar: A critical overview. Applied Linguistics, 36(3), 367–384. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Thornton, S., & Marion, J.
(2004) Classical dynamics of particles and systems (5th ed.). Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.Google Scholar
Towell, R., & Hawkins, R.
(1994) Approaches to second language acquisition. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Truscott, J.
(1996) The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning, 46, 327–369. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2004) The effectiveness of grammar instruction: Analysis of a meta-analysis. English Teaching and Instruction, 28(3), 17–29.Google Scholar
Ullman, M.
(2005) A cognitive neuroscience perspective on second language acquisition: The declarative/procedural model. In C. Sanz (Ed.), Mind and context in adult second language acquisition (pp. 141–178). Washington, DC: Georgetown University.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B.
(2000) Thirty years of input (or intake, the neglected sibling). In B. Swierzbin, F. Morris, M. Anderson, C. Klee, & E. Tarone (Eds.), Social and cognitive factors in second language acquisition (pp. 287–311). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B., & Williams, J.
(Eds.) (2007) Theories in second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
(Eds.) (2015) Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Wagner-Gough, K., & Hatch, E.
(1975) The importance of input in second language acquisition studies. Language Learning, 25, 297–308. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
White, L.
(2000) Second language acquisition: from initial state to final state. In J. Archibald (Ed.), Second language acquisition and linguistic theory (pp. 130–155). Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
(2003) Fossilization in steady state L2 grammars: Persistent problems with inflectional morphology. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 6, 129–141. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wolter, B., & Gyllstad, H.
(2013) Frequency of input and L2 collocational processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35(3), 451–482. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by other publications

Fogal, Gary G
2020. Investigating Variability in L2 Development: Extending a Complexity Theory Perspective on L2 Writing Studies and Authorial Voice. Applied Linguistics 41:4  pp. 575 ff. Crossref logo
Levine, Glenn S.
2020. References. The Modern Language Journal 104:S1  pp. 103 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 30 october 2020. 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.