Document Type : Research Paper


1 Payam Noor University

2 University of Tehran


Epistemologically speaking, second language acquisition research (SLAR) might be reconsidered from a complex dynamical system view with interconnected aspects in the ecosystem of language acquisition. The present paper attempts to introduce the tenets of complex system theory and its application in SLAR. It has been suggested that the present dominant traditions in language acquisition research are too simplistic to delve into the nature of language acquisition. The belief is that the Newtonian conceptualization of SLA research cannot be comprehensive to deal with the complexities of language acquisition research. So the suggested definition for SLA research in the present paper is a complex dynamical nonlinear open adaptive system of inquiry to find probable solutions to problems.


Bates, E. & Thelen, E. (2003). Connectionism and dynamic systems: Are they really different? Development Science, 6, 4, 378-391.
Brown, J. D. (1988). Understanding research in second language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Cameron, L. (2003). Metaphor in educational discourse. London: Continuum.
Cummins, R. (1983). The Nature of psychological explanation. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.
De Bot, K. (2008). Introduction: Second language development as a dynamic process. The Modern Language Journal, 92, 166-178.
De Bot, K., Lowie, W., & Verspoor, M. (2007). A dynamic system theory approach to second language acquisition, Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 10, 1, 7-21.
De Bot, K., Lowie, W., Thorne, S. L., & Verspoor, M. (2013). Dynamic system theory as a theory of second language development. In M. Mayo, M. Gutierrez-Mangado, and M. Adrian (Eds.), Contemporary approaches to second language acquisition (pp. 199-220). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics: quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methodologies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gell-Mann, M. (1994). The quark and the jaguar: Adventures in the simple and the complex. New York: W.H. Freeman & Co.
Gleick, J. (1987). Chaos: Making a new science. New York: Viking-Penguin.
Grotjahn, R. (1987). On the methodological basis of introspective methods. In C. Færch & G. Kasper (eds.), Introspection in second language research (pp. 54–81). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Harrington, M. (2002). Cognitive perspectives on second language acquisition. In R. B. Kaplan (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Applied Linguistics (pp. 124-140). New York: Oxford University Press.
Holland, J. H. (1995). Hidden order: How adaptation builds complexity. Massachusetts: Helix Books.
Hornberger, N. (2002). Multilingual language geopolitics and the continua of a biliteracy: An echological approach. Language Policy, 1, 27–51.
Jordan, G. (2004). Theory construction in second language acquisition. Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (1997). Chaos/complexity science and second language acquisition. Applied Linguistic, 18, 141-165.
Larsen-Freeman, D. & Cameron, L. (2008). Complex systems and applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Larsen-Freeman, D. & Cameron, L. (2008). Research methodology on language development from a complex system perspective, Modern Language Journal, 92,2, 200-213.
Larsen-Freeman, D. & Long, M. H. (1991). An introduction to second language acquisition research. London: Longman.
Lindley, (1997). Quantum mechanics get real. Science News, 151, 9. Available at:
Littlewood, W. (2004). Second language learning. In C. Elder and A. Davies (Eds.) The handbook of applied linguistics, Oxford: Balckwell.
Mackey, A. & Gass, S. (2005). Second language acquisition research: Methodology and design. Routledge Publishing Company.
Plaza-Pust, C. (2008). Dynamic systems theory and Universal Grammar: Holding a turbulent mirror to development in grammars, The Modern Language Journal, 92, 2, 250-269.
Reichardt, C. & Cook, T. (1979). Beyond qualitative versus quantitative methods. In T. Cook & C. Reichardt (eds.), Qualitative and quantitative methods in education research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Sardar, Z. & Abrams, I. (1999). Introducing chaos. Cambridge: Icon Books, Ltd.
Stewart, I. (2002). Does God play dice? The mathematics of chaos. Wiley-Blackwell.
Thelen, E., & Smith, L. (1994). A dynamic systems approach to the development of cognition and action. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Van Geert.(2008).The dynamic systems approach in the study of L1 and L2 acquisition: An introduction. Modern Language Journal, 92, 179–199.
Van Lier, L. (1997). Approaches to observation in classroom research: Observation from an ecological perspective. TESOL Quarterly, 31,4, 783-787.
Van Lier, L. (1988). The classroom and the language learner: Ethnography and second language classroom research. London: Longman.
Van Lier, L. (2000). From input to affordance: Social-interactive learning from an ecological perspective. In J. Lantolf (ed), Sociocultural theory and second language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Van Lier, L. (2004): The ecology and semiotics of language learning. A sociocultural perspective. Boston: Kluwer Academic.
Verspoor, M., Lowie, W., & van Dijk, M. (2008). Variability in second language development from a dynamic systems perspective. Modern Language Journal, 92, 214–231.
Waldrop, M, M. (1992). Complexity: The emerging science at the edge of order and chaos. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Watson-Gegeo, K. A. (2004). Mind, language, and epistemology: Toward a language socialization paradigm for SLA. The Modern Language Journal, 88(3), 331-350.
Weisler, S. & Milekic, S. (2000). Theory of language. Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.