Cover not available
Part of
Complex Dynamic Systems Theory and L2 Writing Development
Edited by Gary G. Fogal and Marjolijn H. Verspoor
[Language Learning & Language Teaching 54] 2020
► pp. 207–238

Chapter 9
A critical appraisal of the CDST approach to investigating linguistic complexity in L2 writing development

| Vrije Universiteit Brussel
| Vrije Universiteit Brussel
This chapter aims to help the complex dynamic systems theory (CDST) approach to second language acquisition reach its full potential by critically appraising its current applications to complexity in L2 writing development. To further this end, we first review five representative empirical CDST-inspired studies on complexity in L2 writing. Second, we contrastively analyze a dataset of beginning L2 writing productions from both a “traditional” and a CDST perspective. Several issues central to a CDST approach are discussed, including the link between CDST concepts and research methods, the emphasis on variation and variability as a window on and a driver of L2 development, the generalizability of findings, anti-reductionism, and the treatment of measurement noise as important information about L2 development. We identify challenges for applying CDST concepts and methods to L2 (writing) development, illustrate how researchers try to come to grips with these challenges, and offer suggestions for addressing them.
Keywords: critical review, linguistic complexity, L2 writing
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • CDST studies on L2 writing development
  • A ‘traditional’ versus CDST analysis of L2 writing development: A case study
    • Participants, data, and measures
    • A traditional analysis
    • A CDST analysis
  • Discussion
    • Added value of a CDST approach
    • Controversial issues
    • Link between new (metaphorical) concepts and research methods
    • Confirmation and selection biases
    • The forest and the trees, or why size matters and extreme anti-reductionism is self-defeating
    • To generalize or not?
    • Bring the noise
  • Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 4 June 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.54.09bul
References (54)
References
Anderson, P., Arrow, K., & Pines, D. (Eds.). (1988). The economy as an evolving complex system. Redwood City, CA: Addison-Wesley. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baba, K., & Nitta, R. (2014). Phase transitions in development of writing fluency from a complex dynamic systems perspective. Language Learning, 64, 1–35. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bassano, D., & van Geert, P. (2007). Modeling continuity and discontinuity in utterance length: A quantitative approach to changes, transitions and intra-individual variability in early grammatical development. Developmental Science, 10(5), 588–612. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bulté, B. (2013). The development of complexity in second language acquisition. A dynamic systems approach (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Brussels (VUB).Google Scholar
Bulté, B., & Housen, A. (2012). Defining and operationalising L2 complexity. In A. Housen, F. Kuiken, & I. Vedder (Eds.), Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency. Investigating complexity, accuracy and fluency in SLA (pp. 21–46). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2014). Conceptualizing and measuring short-term changes in L2 writing complexity. Journal of Second Language Writing, 26, 42–65. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2018). Syntactic complexity in L2 writing: Individual pathways and emerging group trends. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 28(1), 147–164. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2019). Beginning L2 complexity development in CLIL and non-CLIL secondary education. Instructed Second Language Acquisition, 3(2), 153–180. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Cameron, L., & Larsen-Freeman, D. (2007). Complex systems and applied linguistics. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 17(2), 226–239. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Caspi, T. (2010). A dynamic perspective on second language development (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands. Retrieved from <[URL]> (7 January, 2020).
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
Churchill, E. (2007). A dynamic systems account of learning a word: From ecology to form relations. Applied Linguistics, 29(3), 339–358. 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
Dörnyei, Z., MacIntyre, P., & Henry, A. (Eds.). (2015). Motivational dynamics in language learning. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N. (2007). Dynamic systems and SLA: The wood and the trees. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 10(1), 23–25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R. (1984). Can syntax be taught? A study of the effects of formal instruction on the acquisition of WH questions by children. Applied Linguistics, 5(2), 138–155. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1985). Sources of variability in interlanguage. Applied Linguistics, 6(2), 118–131. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
“Five Graces Group”, Beckner, C., Blythe, R., Bybee, J., Christiansen, M. H., Croft, W., … & Schenemann, T. (2009). Language is a complex adaptive system: Position paper. Language Learning, 59, 1–26. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fogal, G. G. (2019). Tracking microgenetic changes in authorial voice development from a complexity theory perspective. Applied Linguistics, 40(3), 432–455. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gánem-Gutiérrez, G. A., & Gilmore, A. (2018). Tracking the real-time evolution of a writing event: Second language writers at different proficiency levels. Language Learning, 68(2), 469–506. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gregersen, T., Macintyre, P., & Meza, M. (2014). The motion of emotion: Idiodynamic case studies of learners’ foreign language anxiety. Modern Language Journal, 98(2), 574–588. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gregg, K. R. (2010). Shallow draughts: Larsen-Freeman and Cameron on complexity. Second Language Research, 26(4), 549–560. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hiver, P., & Al-Hoorie, A. H. (2016). A dynamic ensemble for second language research: Putting complexity theory into practice. Modern Language Journal, 100(4), 741–756. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hiver, P. & Al-Hoorie, A. H. (2020). Research methods for complexity theory in applied linguistics. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Huebner, T. (1985). System and variability in interlanguage syntax. Language Learning, 35, 141–163. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Larsen-Freeman, D. (1997). Chaos/complexity science and second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 18(2), 141–165. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
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, 590–619. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Larsen–Freeman, D., & Cameron, L. (2008). Complex systems and applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lowie, W., Plat, R., & de Bot, K. (2014). Pink noise in language production: A nonlinear approach to the multilingual lexicon. Ecological Psychology, 26(3), 216–228. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lowie, W., & Verspoor, M. (2015). Variability and variation in second language acquisition orders: A dynamic reevaluation. Language Learning, 65, 63–88. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2019). Individual differences and the ergodicity problem. Language Learning, 69, 184–206. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
MacIntyre, P., & Legatto, J. (2011). A dynamic system approach to willingness to communicate: Developing an idiodynamic method to capture rapidly changing affect. Applied Linguistics, 32, 149–171. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nickerson, R. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology, 2(2), 175–220. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2009). Towards an organic approach to investigating CAF in instructed SLA: The case of complexity. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 555–578. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pallotti, G. (2009). CAF: Defining, refining and differentiating constructs. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 590–601. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015). A simple view of linguistic complexity. Second Language Research, 31(1), 117–134. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pienemann, M. (2007). Variation and dynamic systems in SLA. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 10(1), 43–45. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Plaza–Pust, C. (2008). Dynamic systems theory and universal grammar: Holding up a turbulent mirror to development in grammars. Modern Language Journal, 92(2), 250–269. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Plonsky, L. (2013). Study quality in SLA: An assessment of designs, analyses, and reporting practices in quantitative L2 research. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35(4), 655–687. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Polat, B., & Kim, Y. (2014). Dynamics of complexity and accuracy: A longitudinal case study of advanced untutored development. Applied Linguistics, 35(2), 184–207. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Robinson, P. (2001). Task complexity, task difficulty, and task production: Exploring interactions in a componential framework. Applied Linguistics, 22(1), 27–57. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
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 (pp. 464–510). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley & Sons. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Spoelman, M., & Verspoor, M. (2010). Dynamic patterns in development of accuracy and complexity: A longitudinal case study in the acquisition of Finnish. Applied Linguistics, 31, 532–553. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Swan, M. (2004). Complex quantum chaos and the present perfect. ELT Journal, 58(1), 68–70. 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 Geert, P. (1991). A dynamic systems model of cognitive and language growth. Psychological Review, 98(1), 3–53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1994). Dynamic systems of development: Change between complexity and chaos. New York, NY: Harvester Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
van Geert, P., & van Dijk, M. (2002). Focus on variability: New tools to study intra-individual variability in developmental data. Infant Behavior and Development, 25, 340–375. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Gelder, T. & Port, R. (1995). It’s about time: An overview of the dynamical approach to cognition. In R. Port & T. van Gelder (Eds.), Mind as motion: Explorations in the dynamics of cognition (pp. 1–45). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Verspoor, M., de Bot, K., & Lowie, W. (Eds.). (2011). A dynamic approach to second language development. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Verspoor, M., Lowie, W., & van Dijk, M. (2008). Variability in second language development from a dynamic systems perspective. Modern Language Journal, 92, 214–231. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vyatkina, N. (2015). New developments in the study of L2 writing complexity: An editorial. Journal of Second Language Writing, 29, 1–2. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vyatkina, N., Hirschmann, H., & Golcher, F. (2015). Syntactic modification at early stages of L2 German writing development: A longitudinal learner corpus study. Journal of Second Language Writing, 29, 28–50. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (8)

Cited by eight other publications

Duan, Shiping & Zhiliang Shi
2024. A longitudinal study of formulaic sequence use in second language writing: Complex dynamic systems perspective. Language Teaching Research 28:2 ► pp. 497 ff. DOI logo
Wang, Peng, Lesya Ganushchak, Camille Welie & Roel van Steensel
2024. The Dynamic Nature of Emotions in Language Learning Context: Theory, Method, and Analysis. Educational Psychology Review 36:4 DOI logo
Zhang, Jianhua & Lawrence Jun Zhang
2024. Examining L2 studentsʼ development of global cohesion and its relationship with their argumentative essay quality. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching DOI logo
Pallotti, Gabriele
2022. Cratylus’ silence: On the philosophy and methodology of Complex Dynamic Systems Theory in SLA. Second Language Research 38:3 ► pp. 689 ff. DOI logo
Pallotti, Gabriele
2023. Constructive dialogue, disruptive criticism and the complex dynamics of academic life. Instructed Second Language Acquisition 7:1 ► pp. 27 ff. DOI logo
Verspoor, Marjolijn & Kees de Bot
2022. Measures of variability in transitional phases in second language development. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 60:1 ► pp. 85 ff. DOI logo
Yu, Hanjing, Hongying Peng & Wander M. Lowie
2022. Dynamics of Language Learning Motivation and Emotions: A Parallel-Process Growth Mixture Modeling Approach. Frontiers in Psychology 13 DOI logo
KLIESCH, MARIA & SIMONE E. PFENNINGER
2021. Cognitive and Socioaffective Predictors of L2 Microdevelopment in Late Adulthood: A Longitudinal Intervention Study. The Modern Language Journal 105:1 ► pp. 237 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 october 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.