This presentation explores L1/L2 complexity research from the Darwinian perspective of Language as a Complex Adaptive System, in an attempt to tease apart inherent variance in language production (at a given point in time) and variance resulting from attaining higher levels of language proficiency (at different points in time).
This presentation explores whether new life can be brought into L1/L2 complexity research from a combination of two perspectives: (1) the Darwinian perspective of language as a Complex System (Mufwene, Coupé and Pellegrino, 2017; The Five Graces Group, 2009), and (2) the distinction between (i) acquisition of a language in daily oral communication and acquisition of the standard language, used in most written communication. At the same time, the presentation offers an extension to BLC Theory (Hulstijn, 2015, 2019), by specifying the roles of three characteristics of complex systems: (i) unequal frequencies (Zipf-like distributions; Lestrade, 2017), (ii) permanent internal variability, and (iii) a multi-layered neural-network architecture (Diessel, 2019, 2020), in which (i) constructions (with partial productivity; Goldberg, 2019) emerge from words, and (ii) morpho-syntactic patterns emerge from constructions. I hypothesize that, while the arbitrary complexity of the written standard language forms an obstacle for the acquisition of the standard language (for people not so smart or people with little learning opportunities), the natural complexity of the spoken language forms a facilitator (rather than an obstacle): you don't have to be smart to acquire an oral language. The characteristics of natural complexity (in particular internal variability and unequal frequencies), to be observed in both spoken and written language, create a challenge for complexity research, aiming at characterizing complexity differences between levels of language proficiency as well as for language assessment practices. We need to empirically tease apart the variability inherent in all oral and written productions, and the variability that is associated to histories and practices of oral and written language use, in particular reading and writing practices. I will illustrate this with speaking and writing data elicited from native speakers of Dutch who differ in age (18-76 years), level of education, and level of profession.
