In:Cross-theoretical Explorations of Interlocutors and their Individual Differences
Edited by Laura Gurzynski-Weiss
[Language Learning & Language Teaching 53] 2020
► pp. 189–208
Chapter 8Complexity Theory
Relational systems in interaction and in interlocutor differences in second language development
Published online: 21 January 2020
https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.53.08lar
https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.53.08lar
Abstract
Complexity theorists are interested in understanding the relations among components in a complex
system and how individual differences in the components affect their relationship to other components. Specific to our interests here,
the ability of speakers to adjust their speech depends on the relationship with the person with whom they interact. Further, all
interactions involve mutual influence (Ricca, 2012). Larsen-Freeman and Cameron (2008a) call this bidirectional influence “co-adaptation.”
Existing research on interaction is briefly surveyed before turning to the view of interlocutor interaction that
Complexity Theory inspires. Before concluding, research attesting to the effect of interlocutor individual differences (age,
experience, sex, status, similarity, identity, first language) is reviewed. Finally, four considerations for enhancing future research
on interlocutor individual differences are proposed.
Article outline
- Introduction
- Interaction: A relational systems perspective
- Interlocutor individual differences
- Age
- Experience
- Sex
- Status (in a task)
- Similarity of interlocutors
- Identity
- First language
- Moving forward in interlocutor research, informed by CDST
- 1.Isolating IDs and encountering unanticipated ones
- 2.Temporally and spatially contextualized
- 3.Emerging and contingent effects
- 4.Relationships that are reciprocal
- Conclusion
Acknowledgements Notes References
References (87)
Atkinson, D., Churchill, E., Nishino, T., & Okada, H. (2007). Alignment
and interaction in a sociocognitive approach to second language acquisition. Modern Language
Journal, 91(2), 169–188.
Babel, M. (2012). Evidence
for phonetic and social selectivity in spontaneous phonetic imitation. Journal of
Phonetics, 40, 177–189.
Beebe, L. (1980). Risk-taking
and the language learner. In H. Seliger & M. Long (Eds.), Classroom-oriented
research in second language
acquisition (pp. 39–66). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Cameron, L. (2003). Challenges
for ELT from the expansion in teaching children. ELT
Journal, 57(2), 105–112.
Capra, F., & Luisi, P. L. (2014). The
systems view of life: A unifying vision. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Costa, A., Pickering, M. J., & Sorace, A. (2008). Alignment
in second language dialogue. Language and Cognitive
Processes, 23(4), 528–556.
Cowley, S. J. (2011). Distributed
language. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Dale, R., & Spivey, M. (2006). Unraveling
the dyad: Using recurrence analysis to explore patterns of syntactic coordination between children and caregivers in
conversation. Language
Learning, 56(3), 391–430.
Damasio, A. (2003). Looking
for Spinoza: Joy, sorrow, and the feeling brain. New York, NY: Harcourt.
Dörnyei, Z. (2009). Individual
differences: Interplay of learner characteristics and learning environment. Language
Learning, 59(Suppl
1), 230–248.
Dörnyei, Z., MacIntyre, P. D., & Henry, A. (Eds.) (2015). Motivational
dynamics in language learning. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Duran, N., & Dale, R. (2014). Perspective-taking
in dialogue as self-organization under social constraints. New Ideas in
Psychology, 32(1), 131–146.
Ellis, N. C., & Larsen-Freeman, D. (2009). Constructing
a second language: Analyses and computational simulations of the emergence of linguistic constructions from
usage. Language Learning, 59(Suppl.
1), 90–125.
Emirbayar, M. (1997). Manifesto
for a relational sociology. American Journal of
Sociology, 103(2), 281–317.
Ferguson, C. A. (1975). Toward
a characterization of English foreigner talk. Anthropological
Linguistics, 17(1), 1–14.
Fusaroli, R., & Tylén, K. (Eds.) (2014). Special
Issue on linguistic coordination: Models, dynamics, and effects. New Ideas in
Psychology, 32(1), 115–182.
Gallotti, M., & Frith, C. D. (2013). Social
cognition in the we-mode. Trends in Cognitive
Science, 17(4), 160–165.
Gallagher, S. (2017). Enactivist
interventions: Rethinking the mind. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Garrod, S., & Anderson, A. (1987). Saying
what you mean in dialogue: A study in conceptual and semantic
coordination. Cognition, 27(2), 181–218.
Gass, S., & Mackey, A. (2006). Input,
interaction, and output. In K. Bardovi-Harlig & Z. Dörnyei (Eds.), Themes
in SLA research: AILA
Review, 19, 3–17.
Gass, S., & Varonis, E. M. (1984). The
effect of familiarity on the comprehensibility of nonnative speech. Language
Learning, 34(1), 65–87.
Geeslin, K. (this
volume). Variationist perspective(s) on interlocutor individual
differences. In L. Gurzynski-Weiss (Ed.), Cross-theoretical
explorations of interlocutors and their individual
differences (pp. 127–157). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Ghanem, R. (2017). Nonnative
speakers’ alignment of linguistic features with different interlocutors. (Unpublished doctoral
dissertation). Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ.
Giles, H., & Smith, P. (1979). Accommodation
theory: Optimal levels of conversation. In H. Giles & R. St. Clair (Eds.), Language
and social
psychology (pp. 45–65). Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.
Guiora, A., Acton, W., Erard, R., & Strickland, F. (1980). The
effects of benzodiazepine (Valium) on permeability of language ego boundaries. Language
Learning, 30(2), 351–363.
Giorgi, F. (2012). Agency. In D. Favareau, P. Cobley, & K. Kull (Eds.), A
more developed sign: Interpreting the work of Jesper
Hoffmeyer (pp. 13–16). Tartu, Finland: Tartu University Press.
Gries, S. T. (2005). Syntactic
priming: A corpus-based approach. Journal of Psycholinguistic
Research, 34(4), 365–399.
Gurzynski-Weiss, L. (this
volume). Synthesizing cross-theoretical explorations of interlocutors and their individual
differences. In L. Gurzynski-Weiss (Ed.), Cross-theoretical
explorations of interlocutors and their individual
differences (pp. 247–266). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Gurzynski-Weiss, L., & Baralt, M. (2014). Exploring
learner perception and use of task-based interactional feedback in FTF and CMC modes. Studies in
Second Language
Acquisition, 36(1), 1–37.
Harvey, L. (2015). Beyond
member-checking: A dialogic approach to the research interview. International Journal of Research
& Method in
Education, 38(1), 23–38.
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.
Hiver, P. & Al-Hoorie, A. H. (2020). Research
methods for complexity theory in applied linguistics. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Iacoboni, M. (2008). Mirroring
people: The new science of how we connect with others. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus, & Giroux.
Jackson, P., & Cosca, C. (1974). The
inequality of educational opportunity in the Southwest: An observational study of ethnically mixed
classrooms. American Educational Research
Journal, 11(3), 219–229.
Joaquin, A. D. L., & Schumann, J. H. (Eds.). (2013). Exploring
the interactional instinct. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Keller-Cohen, D. (2015). Audience
design and social relations in aging. Research on
Aging, 37(7), 741–762.
Kim, M., Horton, W. S., & Bradlow, A. R. (2011). Phonetic
convergence in spontaneous conversations as a function of interlocutor language
distance. Laboratory
Phonology, 2(1), 125–156.
King, J. (Ed.) (2016). The
dynamic interplay between context and language learner. Houndmills, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Kirk, S. (2017, September). The
function of rhythm and interactive alignment in creating confluence in conversation. Paper presented at
the British Association of Applied Linguistics Conference, University of
Leeds, UK.
Lantolf, J. P. (this
volume). I ~ You > You ~ Me: The hidden other in L2
development. In L. Gurzynski-Weiss (Ed.), Cross-theoretical
explorations of interlocutors and their individual
differences (pp. 79–97). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (1997). Chaos/complexity
science and second language acquisition. Applied
Linguistics, 18(2), 140–165.
(2011). A
complexity theory approach to second language
development/acquisition. In D. Atkinson (Ed.), Alternative
approaches to second language
acquisition (pp. 48–72). New York, NY: Routledge.
(2015). Ten
‘lessons’ from Complex Dynamic Systems Theory: What is on offer. In Z. Dörnyei, P. D. MacIntyre, & A. Henry (Eds.), Motivational
dynamics in language
learning (pp. 11–19). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
(2017a). Shifting
metaphors: From computer input to ecological affordances to
adaptation. In Proceedings from the IATEFL 50th Anniversary
Conference, Birmingham (pp. 10–19). Kent, UK: IATEFL.
(2017b). Complexity
Theory: The lessons continue. In L. Ortega & Z.-H. Han (Eds.), Complexity
theory in language development: In celebration of Diane
Larsen-Freeman (pp. 11–50). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.
(2017c, October). On
particularizing second language development. Paper presented at
the Second Language Research Forum, The Ohio State University.
Larsen-Freeman, D., & Cameron, L. (2008a). Complex
systems and applied linguistics. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
(2008b). Research
methodology on language development from a Complex Systems perspective. Modern Language
Journal, 92(2), 200–213.
Larsen-Freeman, D., & Long, M. (1991). An
introduction to second language acquisition research. London, UK: Longman.
Lee, N., Mikesell, L., Joaquin, D. J., Mates, A. W., & Schumann, J. H. (2009). The
interactional instinct: The evolution and acquisition of language. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Linell, P. (2009). Rethinking
language, mind, and world dialogically: Interactional and contextual theories of human
sense-making. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Long, M. H. (1983). Linguistic
and conversational adjustments to non-native speakers. Studies in Second Language
Acquisition, 5(2), 177–193.
Macqueen, S. (2012). The
emergence of patterns in second language writing: A sociocognitive exploration of lexical
trails. Bern, Switzerland: Peter Lang.
Mascolo, M. F., van Geert, P., Steenbeek, H., & Fischer, K. W. (2016). What
can dynamic systems models of development offer to the study of developmental
psychopathology? In D. Cicchetti (Ed.), Developmental
psychopathology (3rd
ed., pp. 665–716). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
McDonough, K., & Mackey, A. (2006). Responses
to recasts: Repetitions, primed production, and linguistic development. Language
Learning, 56(4), 693–720.
Namy, L., Nygaard, L. C., & Sauerteig, D. (2012). Gender
differences in vocal accommodation: The role of perception. Journal of Language and Social
Psychology, 21, 422–432.
Norton, B. (2013). Identity
and language learning: Extending the conversation (2nd ed.). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Ortega, L., & Han, Z.-H. (Eds.) (2017). Complexity
Theory and language development: In celebration of Diane Larsen-Freeman. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Oullier, O., de Guzman, G. C., Jantzen, K. J., Lagarde, J., & Kelso, J. A. S. (2008). Social
coordination dynamics: Measuring human bonding. Social
Neuroscience, 3(2), 178–192.
Pardo, J. S. (2006). On
phonetic convergence during conversational interaction. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of
America, 119(4), 2382–2393.
Pickering, M. J., & Garrod, S. (2004). The
interactive-alignment model: Developments and refinements. Behavioral and Brain
Sciences, 27(2), 212–225.
Pikovsky, A., Rosenblum, M., & Kurths, J. (2001). Synchronization.
A universal concept in nonlinear sciences. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Ricca, B. (2012). Beyond
teaching methods: A complexity approach. Complicity: An International Journal of Complexity and
Education, 9(2), 31–51..
Sato, C. (1982). Ethnic
styles in classroom discourse. In M. Hines & W. Rutherford (Eds.), On
TESOL
’81 (pp. 11–24). Washington, DC: TESOL.
Serafini, E. J. (2017). Exploring
the dynamic long-term interaction between cognitive and psychosocial resources in adult second language development at varying
proficiency. Modern Language
Journal, 101(2), 369–390.
(this
volume). The impact of learner perceptions of interlocutor individual differences on learner
possible selves during a short-term experience abroad. In L. Gurzynski-Weiss (Ed.), Cross-theoretical
explorations of interlocutors and their individual
differences (pp. 209–243). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Spevack, S. C., Falandays, J. B., Batzloff, B., & Spivey, M. J. (2018). Interactivity
of language. Linguistics and Language Compass. <[URL]> (June 30, 2018).
Stivers, T. (2008). Stance,
alignment, and affiliation during storytelling: When nodding is a token of affiliation. Research on
Language and Social
Interaction, 41(1), 31–57.
Strogatz, S. (2003). Sync:
How order emerges from chaos in the universe, nature, and daily life. New York, NY: Hachette Books.
Tarone, E. (2015). Second
language acquisition in applied linguistics: 1925–2015 and beyond. Applied
Linguistics, 36(4), 444–453.
Tarone, E., & Swain, M. (1995). A
sociolinguistic perspective on second-language use in immersion classrooms. Modern Language
Journal, 79(2), 166–178.
Thelen, E. (2005). Dynamic
systems theory and the complexity of change. Psychoanalytic
Dialogues, 15(2), 255–283.
Thibault, P. (2015). The
microgenesis of meaning and value: Differentiation-articulation in brain and body and the text-context relation in systemic
functional linguistics. In G. Kvåle, E. Maagerø, & A. Veum (Eds.), Kontekst,
språk og
multimodaltitet (pp. 201–269). Bergen, Norway: Fagbokforlaget Vigmostad & Bjørke AS.
Thoms, J. J. (2014). An
ecological view of whole-class discussions in a second language literature classroom: Teacher reformulations as affordances for
learning. Modern Language
Journal, 98(3), 724–741.
Tognoli, E., & Kelso, S. (2015). The
coordination dynamics of social neuromarkers. Frontiers in Human
Neuroscience, 9,
article 563, 1–16.
Tomasello, M. (2003). Constructing
a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Trofimovich, P., & Kennedy, S. (2014). Interactive
alignment between bilingual interlocutors: Evidence from two information-exchange
tasks. Bilingualism: Language and
Cognition 17(4), 822–836.
Ushioda, E. (2015). Context
and complex dynamic systems theory. In Z. Dörnyei, P. D. MacIntyre, & A. Henry (Eds.), Motivational
dynamics in language
learning (pp. 47–54). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Van Engen, K. J., Baese-Berk, M., Baker, R. E., Kim, M., & Bradlow, A. R. (2010). The
Wildcat Corpus of native- and foreign-accented English: Communicative efficiency across conversational dyads with varying language
alignment profiles. Language &
Speech, 53(4), 510–540.
Verspoor, M., de Bot, K., & Lowie, W. (Eds.). (2011). A
dynamic approach to second language development: Methods and techniques. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Cited by (7)
Cited by seven other publications
Li, Cha & Mingcai Sui
Peng, Hongying & Hanjing Yu
Whittle, Anna
Yu, Hanjing & Hongying Peng
Li, Cha & Lawrence Jun Zhang
Hiver, Phil, Ali H. Al-Hoorie & Diane Larsen-Freeman
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 26 november 2025. 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.
