Language Learning as Chaos/Complexity System: Evidence Based on Iranian EFL Learners’ Backgrounds

Abstract

Language learning process was traditionally investigated through the reductionist perspective treating language learning as a fixed, linear, cause and effect phenomenon in addition to imposing three levels of reductionism including context reduction, data reduction, and complexity reduction on the field of SLA. With the emergence of Chaos/Complexity Theory (CC/T), language learning was considered as a nonlinear, complex, and dynamic system evolving, growing, and changing from the bottom-up in an organic and unpredictable manner through the dynamics of language. In complex systems such as language learning, the Language learning process was traditionally investigated through the reductionist perspective as a fixed, linear, cause and effect phenomenon in addition to imposing three levels of reductionism including context reduction, data reduction, and complexity reduction on the field of Second Language Acquisition (SLA). With the emergence of Chaos/Complexity Theory (CC/T), language learning was considered as a nonlinear, complex, and dynamic system evolving, growing, and changing from the bottom-up in an organic and unpredictable manner through the dynamics of language. Considering language learning as a complex system, its complex behavior as a whole is influenced by a large number of factors, forces, and agents within or beyond its boundaries which is more than the behavior of its individual components. Despite the fact that C/CT provides new insights, understandings, and implications for researchers in the field of SLA, very few practical attempts are available which investigate the complexities of language learning. Accordingly, ten male/ female Iranian EFL learners participated in this narrative research based on purposive sampling. The researcher used semi- structured interview to elicit participants’ histories and stories concerning their language learning process. After the transcription of the data, the participants’ personal experiences and histories in terms of time and place were reorganized, analyzed, and shaped into a framework on the basis of a chronological sequence. In regard to the theoretical underpinnings and insights of C/CT, the derived meanings and themes showed the pieces of evidence to justify the complexities of Iranian EFL learners’ language learning. 

Keywords: Chaos/Complexity Theory, reductionism, SLA, narrative research, language learning process

Öz

Dil öğrenme süreci; geleneksel olarak, İkinci Dil Edinimi (SLA) alanında bağlam azaltma, veri azaltma ve karmaşıklık azaltma şeklinde üç aşamalı bir indirgemeyi empoze ederken indirgemeci bir bakış açısıyla sabit, doğrusal, sebep-sonuç ilişkili bir fenomen olarak incelenmiştir. Kaos/Karmaşıklık Teorisinin (CC/T) ortaya çıkmasıyla birlikte dil öğrenme, dilin dinamikleriyle aşağıdan yukarıya organik ve öngörülemeyen bir biçimde gelişen, büyüyen ve değişen doğrusal olmayan, karmaşık ve dinamik bir sistem olarak nitelendirilmiştir. Dil öğrenimi karmaşık bir sistem olarak düşünüldüğünde, bunun bir bütün olarak karmaşık davranışları, bireysel bileşenlerinin davranışlarından çok, sınırları içindeki veya dışındaki çok sayıda faktör, kuvvet ve aracı tarafından etkilenir. C/CT, SLA alanındaki araştırmacılar için yeni fikir, anlayış ve çıkarımlar sağlamasına karşın, dil öğreniminin karmaşıklığını incelemeye yönelik çok az sayıda pratik girişim bulunmaktadır. Bu doğrultuda, on erkek / kadın İranlı EFL öğrencisi amaçlı örneklemeye dayalı bu anlatı araştırmasına katıldı. Araştırmacı, katılımcıların dil öğrenme süreciyle ilgili geçmişlerini ve öykülerini ortaya çıkarmak için yarı-yapılandırılmış görüşme kullandı. Verilerin transkripsiyonunun ardından katılımcıların zaman ve mekân bağlamındaki bireysel deneyimleri ve geçmişleri yeniden düzenlendi, incelendi ve kronolonojik sıralanıma dayalı bir çerçeveye yerleştirildi. C/CT’nin teorik destek ve içgörüleri ışığında, elde edilen anlam ve temalar İranlı EFL öğrencilerinin dil öğrenimi karmaşıklığını gerekçelendirmek için kanıt parçaları sundular.

Anahtar sözcükler: Kaos/Karmaşıklık Teorisi, indirgemecilik, SLA, anlatısal araştırma, dil öğrenme süreci

 

Keywords

• Chaos/Complexity Theory, reductionism, SLA, narrative research, language learning process

Kaos/Karmaşıklık Sistemi Olarak Dil Öğrenme: İranlı EFL Öğrencilerinin Geçmişlerine Dayalı Kanıtlar

Öz

Dil öğrenme süreci; geleneksel olarak, İkinci Dil Edinimi (SLA) alanında bağlam azaltma, veri azaltma ve karmaşıklık azaltma şeklinde üç aşamalı bir indirgemeyi empoze ederken indirgemeci bir bakış açısıyla sabit, doğrusal, sebep-sonuç ilişkili bir fenomen olarak incelenmiştir. Kaos/Karmaşıklık Teorisinin (CC/T) ortaya çıkmasıyla birlikte dil öğrenme, dilin dinamikleriyle aşağıdan yukarıya organik ve öngörülemeyen bir biçimde gelişen, büyüyen ve değişen doğrusal olmayan, karmaşık ve dinamik bir sistem olarak nitelendirilmiştir. Dil öğrenimi karmaşık bir sistem olarak düşünüldüğünde, bunun bir bütün olarak karmaşık davranışları, bireysel bileşenlerinin davranışlarından çok, sınırları içindeki veya dışındaki çok sayıda faktör, kuvvet ve aracı tarafından etkilenir. C/CT, SLA alanındaki araştırmacılar için yeni fikir, anlayış ve çıkarımlar sağlamasına karşın, dil öğreniminin karmaşıklığını incelemeye yönelik çok az sayıda pratik girişim bulunmaktadır. Bu doğrultuda, on erkek / kadın İranlı EFL öğrencisi amaçlı örneklemeye dayalı bu anlatı araştırmasına katıldı. Araştırmacı, katılımcıların dil öğrenme süreciyle ilgili geçmişlerini ve öykülerini ortaya çıkarmak için yarı-yapılandırılmış görüşme kullandı. Verilerin transkripsiyonunun ardından katılımcıların zaman ve mekân bağlamındaki bireysel deneyimleri ve geçmişleri yeniden düzenlendi, incelendi ve kronolonojik sıralanıma dayalı bir çerçeveye yerleştirildi. C/CT’nin teorik destek ve içgörüleri ışığında, elde edilen anlam ve temalar İranlı EFL öğrencilerinin dil öğrenimi karmaşıklığını gerekçelendirmek için kanıt parçaları sundular.

Anahtar sözcükler: Kaos/Karmaşıklık Teorisi, indirgemecilik, SLA, anlatısal araştırma, dil öğrenme süreci

Abstract

Language learning process was traditionally investigated through the reductionist perspective as a fixed, linear, cause and effect phenomenon in addition to imposing three levels of reductionism including context reduction, data reduction, and complexity reduction on the field of Second Language Acquisition (SLA). With the emergence of Chaos/Complexity Theory (CC/T), language learning was considered as a nonlinear, complex, and dynamic system evolving, growing, and changing from the bottom-up in an organic and unpredictable manner through the dynamics of language. Considering language learning as a complex system, its complex behavior as a whole is influenced by a large number of factors, forces, and agents within or beyond its boundaries which is more than the behavior of its individual components. Despite the fact that C/CT provides new insights, understandings, and implications for researchers in the field of SLA, very few practical attempts are available which investigate the complexities of language learning. Accordingly, ten male/ female Iranian EFL learners participated in this narrative research based on purposive sampling. The researcher used semi- structured interview to elicit participants’ histories and stories concerning their language learning process. After the transcription of the data, the participants’ personal experiences and histories in terms of time and place were reorganized, analyzed, and shaped into a framework on the basis of a chronological sequence. In regard to the theoretical underpinnings and insights of C/CT, the derived meanings and themes showed the pieces of evidence to justify the complexities of Iranian EFL learners’ language learning.

Keywords: Chaos/Complexity Theory, reductionism, SLA, narrative research, language learning process

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Kaos/Karmaşıklık Teorisi, indirgemecilik, SLA, anlatısal araştırma, dil öğrenme süreci

Kaynakça

1. Ahmadi, A. (2011). Chaos theory and language assessment: The effect of sensitivity to initial conditions on test performance. International Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 1(17), 293-296.
2. Andrews, M., Squire, C., & Tamboukou, M. (Eds.). (2008). Doing narrative research. London: Sage.
3. Ary, D., Jacobs, L.C., & Sorenson, C. (2010). Introduction to research education (8th Ed.). New York, NY: Wadswort.
4. Briggs, J. (1992). Fractals: The patterns of chaos. New York: Simon: and Schuster.
5. Brown, H. D. (2009). Principles of language learning and teaching. New York, NY: Longman.
6. Chomsky, N. (1966). Linguistic theory. In R. G. Mead, Jr. (Ed.), Language teaching: Broader contexts, Northeast Conference on the Teaching of Foreign Languages. New York: MLA Materials Center, 1966.
7. De Bot, K. (2005). Dynamic systems theory and applied linguistics. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 15, 116-118.
8. De Bot, K., Lowie, W., & Verspoor, M. (2005). Second language acquisition. An advanced resource book. London: Routledge Group.

9. Dornyei, Z., & Murphey, T. (2003). Group dynamics in the language classroom. Cambridge: CUP.
10. Ellis, N. (1998). Emergentism, connectionism and language learning. Language Learning, 48(4), 631-664. doi: 10.1111/0023-8333.00063
11. Ellis, N. (2007). Dynamic systems and SLA: The wood and the trees. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 10(1), 23-25.
12. Feryok, A. (2010). Language teacher cognitions: Complex dynamic systems? System, 38, 272-279.
13. Finch, A. E. (2001). Complexity in the language classroom. Secondary Education Research, 47, 105-40.
14. Finch, A. (2002). A systems view of the EFL class: Mapping complexity. English Linguistic Science, 11, 15-26. Retrieved August 14, 2015, from http://www.finchpark.com/arts/systems-1.pdf.
15. Finch, A. (2004). Complexity and systems theory: Implications for the EFL teacher /researcher. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 1(2), 27-46. Retrieved May 10, 2015, from http://www.finchpark.com/arts/complexity-system.pdf.
16. Hadidi Tamjid, N. (2007). Chaos/complexity theory in second language acquisition. Novitas-Royal, 1(1), 10-17.
17. Hall, N. (1993). Exploring chaos: A guide to the new science of disorder. New York: Academic Press.
18. Harshbarger, B. (2007). Chaos, complexity and language learning. ICU Language Research Bulletin, 22, 17-31.
19. Hashamdar, M. (2012). First language acquisition: Is it compatible with chaos/complexity theory? Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2(7), 1503-1507.
20. Kauffman, S. (1991). Antichaos and adaptation. Scientific American. 78-84.
21. Kirshbaum, D. (2002). Introduction to complex system. Retriewed August 15, 2014, from http://www.calresco.org/intro.htm#eme.
22. Klein, W. (1998). The contribution of second language acquisition research. Language Learning, 48, 527-50.
23. Krashen, S.D. (1987). The monitor model for second language acquisition. In R. C. Gingras, (Ed.), Second language acquisition & foreign language teaching (pp. 1-26). Center for Applied Linguistics: Washington.
24. Larsen-Freeman, D. (1997). Chaos/complexity science and second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 18, 141-65.
25. Larsen-Freeman, D. (2002). Language acquisition and language use from a chaos/complexity theory perspective. In C. Kramsch (Ed.), Language acquisition and socialization (pp.33-46). London: Continuum International Publishing Group.
26. Larsen-Freeman, D. (2003). Teaching language from grammar to grammaring. Boston: Heinle/Thomson.
27. Larsen-Freeman, D. (2006). The emergence of complexity, fluency, and accuracy in the oral and written production of five Chinese learners. Applied Linguistics, 27(4), 590-619.
28. Larsen-Freeman, D., & Cameron, L. (2008). Complex systems and applied linguistics. UK: Oxford University Press.
29. Larsen-Freeman, D., & Long. M. H. (1991). An Introduction to Second Language Acquisition Research. New York: Longman.
30. Long, M. H. (1981). Input, interaction and second language acquisition. In H. Winitz (Ed.), Native language and foreign language acquisition annals of the New York Academy of Sciences (pp. 259-278). New York: New York Academy of Sciences.
31. Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie and T. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413- 465). San Diego: Academic Press.
32. Mahmoodzadeh, N. (2013). Applied ELT: A paradigm justifying complex adaptive system of Language teaching? International Journal of English Language and Translation Studies, 1(1), 57-74.
33. Menezes, V. (2013). Second language acquisition: Reconciling Theories. Open Journal of Applied Linguistics, 3, 404-412.
34. Mirzae, S., & Ghanizadeh, A. (2014). On the legitimacy of emergentism and chaos complexity theory as conceivable challenges to the nativist paradigm. International Journal of Research Studies, 3(4), 97-106.
35. Mohanan, K. P. (1992). Emergence of complexity in phonological development. In C. Ferguson, L. Menn, and C. Stoel-Gammon (Eds.), Phonological development. Timonium, MD: York Press.
36. Ockerman, C. (1997). Facilitating and learning at the edge of chaos: Expanding the context of experimental education. Paper presented at the AEE International Conference (ERIC document ED 414 142).
37. Percival, I. (1993). Chaos: A science for the real world. In N. Hall (Ed.), Exploring chaos: A guide to the new science of disorder. New York: Norton and Company.
38. Schumann, H. J. (1978). The Acculturation model for second language acquisition. In R. C. Gingras (Ed.), Second Language Acquisition and Foreign Language Teaching (pp.27-50). Washington: Center for Applied Linguistics.
39. Seyyedrezae, S. H. (2014). The application of chaos/complexity theory in classroom teaching, task design and lesson planning. Journal of Language Sciences & Linguistics, 2(2), 27-32.
40. Soleimani, H., & Farrokh Alaee, F. (2014). Complexity theory and CALL curriculum in foreign language learning. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, 3(3), 19-25.
41. Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning. In G. Cook and B. Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principle and practice in applied linguistics studies in honour of H. G. Widdowson (pp. 125-44). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
42. Swan, M. (2004). Complex quantum chaos and the present perfect. ELT Journal, 58 (1), 68-70.
43. Tarone, E. (1979). Interlanguage as chameleon. Language Learning. 29, 181-91.
44. -
45. Thelen, E., & Smith, L. (1994). A dynamic systems approach to the development of cognition and action. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
46. Valle, V. Jr. (2000). Chaos, complexity and deterrence. Technical Report, National War College, April 2000.
47. van Greet, P., & Steenbeek, H. (2005). A complexity and dynamic systems approach to development assessment, modeling and research. In K.W. Fischer, A. Battro, & P. Lena (Eds.), Mind, brain, and education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
48. van Greet, P. (2000). The dynamics of general developmental mechanisms: From Piaget and Vygotsky to dynamic systems models. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9, 64-88.
49. van Lier, L. (2004). The ecology and semiotics of language learning: A sociocultural perspective. Norwell, Massachusetts: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
50. Waldrop, M. (1993). Complexity: The emerging science at the edge of order and chaos. NewYork: Simon and Schuster.
51. Wertsch, J. V., Del Rio, P., & Alvarez, A. (Eds.) (1995). Sociocultural studies of mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.