Theory and Practice in Language Studies, Vol 2, No 7 (2012), 1503-1507, Jul 2012
doi:10.4304/tpls.2.7.1503-1507

First Language Acquisition: Is It Compatible with Chaos/Complexity Theory?

Mohammad Hashamdar

Abstract


This paper intends to use analogy to describe first language acquisition. Larsen-Freeman (1997) asserted that "analogies are only helpful if by knowing something about one member of the pair, we can advance our understanding of the other" (p.157). It is difficult to tell if the analogy between chaos/complexity theory and first language acquisition can be beneficial for the researchers to have better understanding of first language acquisition. This study can be considered as unique in its own place. Few articles have been devoted to this type of analogy. Most researchers have preferred to deal with the issue of second language acquisition and chaos/complexity theory. The researcher hopes to have shed some light on the issue and expects to attract the attention of the other researcher to this analogy. The purpose of science is better understanding of the world and the phenomena inside it. Therefore, it is expected to better understand the most complex phenomenon which is nothing more than first language acquisition.


Keywords


adaptivity; attractor; chaos/complexity theory; dynamicity; linearity; sensitive initial state

References


 

[1] Barab, S. A. et al. (1999). Principles of self-organization: learning as participation in autocatakinetic systems. The Journal of the Learning Sciences,8, 349-390.

[2] Berreby, D. (1994). Murray gell-mann. The new York Times Magazine, 24-27.

[3] Birjandi, P., & Hashamdar, M. (2009). Individual differences in first language acquisition. ELT Weekly, 33, 1-4.

[4] Davis, B. & Sumara, D. J. (1997). Cognition, complexity, and teacher education. Harvard Educational Review, 67, 105-125.

[5] Davis, B. et al. (2000). Engaging minds: learning and teaching in a complex world. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

[6] Doll, W. E. (1989). Complexity in the classroom. Educational leadership, 47, 65-70.

[7] Doll, W. E. (1993). Curriculum possibilities in a "post"-future. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 8, 277-292.

[8] Doolittle, P.E. (2000) Complex constructivism: A theoretical model of complexity and cognition. Retrieved June 22, 2010, from http://www.chre.vt.edu/fs/doolittle/research/complex1.html.

[9] Griffiths, D. (1997). The case for theoretical pluralism. Educational Management and Administration, 25, 371-380.

[10] Guijarro-Fuentes, P., & Domínguez, L. (2010). New directions in language acquisition: romance languages in the generative perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

[11] Kauffman, S. (1995). At home in the universe: the search for the laws of selforganization and complexity. New York: Oxford University Press.

[12] Langacker, R. W. (2001). Dynamicity in grammar. Axiomathes, 12, 7-33.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1012701031022

[13] Larsen-Freeman, D. (1997). Chaos/complexity science and second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 18, 141-165.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/applin/18.2.141

[14] Larsen-Freeman, D. (2000). Second language acquisition and applied linguistics. In W. Grabe (ed.), Applied Linguistics as an Emerging Discipline, Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 20, 165-181.

[15] Larsen-Freeman, D., & Long, M.H. (1991). An introduction to second language acquisition research. New York: Longman.

[16] Larsen-Freeman, D. & Cameron, L. (2008). Complex systems and applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

[17] Mallows, D. (2002). Non-linearity and the observed lesson. ELT Journal, 56 (1), 3-10.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/elt/56.1.3

[18] Nelson, C. (2011). The complexity of language learning. International Journal of Instruction,4 (2), 93-112.

[19] Sullivan, T. J. (1999). Leading people in a chaotic world. Journal of Educational Administration, 37, 408-423.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09578239910288360

[20] Thornbury, S. (2001). Uncovering grammar. London: Macmillan Heinemann.

[21] Van Lier, L. (2000). From input to affordance: Social-interactive learning from an ecological perspective. In J. P. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning: recent advances. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

[22] Van Lier, L. (2004). The ecology and semiotics of language learning: A sociocultural perspective. New York: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-7912-5

[23] Waldrop, M, M. (1992). Complexity: The emerging science at the edge of order and chaos. Simon and Schuster. New York.

[24] Zellermayer, M. & Margolin, I. (2005). Teacher educators‟ professional learning described through the lens of complexity theory. Teachers College Record, 107, 1275-1304.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2005.00513.x


Full Text: PDF


Theory and Practice in Language Studies (TPLS, ISSN 1799-2591)

Copyright @ 2006-2012 by ACADEMY PUBLISHER – All rights reserved.