Abstract

A large body studies into individual differences in second language learning has shown that success in second language learning is strongly affected by a set of relevant learner characteristics ranging from the age of onset to motivation, aptitude, and personality. Most studies have concentrated on a limited number of learner characteristics and have argued for the relative importance of some of these factors. Clearly, some learners are more successful than others, and it is tempting to try to find the factor or combination of factors that can crack the code to success. However, isolating one or several global individual characteristics can only give a partial explanation of success in second language learning. The limitation of this approach is that it only reflects on rather general personality characteristics of learners at one point in time, while both language development and the factors affecting it are instances of complex dynamic processes that develop over time. Factors that have been labelled as “individual differences” as well as the development of proficiency are characterized by nonlinear relationships in the time domain, due to which the rate of success cannot be simply deduced from a combination of factors. Moreover, in complex dynamic systems theory (CDST) literature it has been argued that a generalization about the interaction of variables across individuals is not warranted when we acknowledge that language development is essentially an individual process (Molenaar, 2015). In this paper, the viability of these generalizations is investigated by exploring the L2 development over time for two identical twins in Taiwan who can be expected to be highly similar in all respects, from their environment to their level of English proficiency, to their exposure to English, and to their individual differences. In spite of the striking similarities between these learners, the development of their L2 English over time was very different. Developmental patterns for spoken and written language even showed opposite tendencies. These observations underline the individual nature of the process of second language development.

Highlights

  • If there is one issue that the majority of researchers in second language acquisition agree on, it is the observation that individual differences (IDs) between learners are statistically associated with the success in second language learning

  • Finding the key to successful L2 learning in groups and individuals approach in which they simultaneously evaluate the relationships among a large number of IDs, they show that motivation most strongly predicts achievement in the L2 (.48), followed by aptitude (.47), while confidence is most strongly loaded by achievement (.60)

  • Dörnyei (2009) refers to IDs as a “myth” and argues that they do not exist as identifiable factors that can contribute to success in second language learning

Read more

Summary

Introduction

If there is one issue that the majority of researchers in second language acquisition agree on, it is the observation that individual differences (IDs) between learners are statistically associated with the success in second language learning. Finding the key to successful L2 learning in groups and individuals approach in which they simultaneously evaluate the relationships among a large number of IDs, they show that motivation most strongly predicts achievement in the L2 (.48), followed by aptitude (.47), while confidence is most strongly loaded by achievement (.60) These and other studies focusing on the relative importance of IDs seem to agree that aptitude (the “talent for language learning”) is one of the most promising factors (prediction of success is .50), followed by motivation (.40). From a complex dynamic systems theory (CDST) perspective, Dörnyei argues, higher-order ID variables can be seen as attractors that act as stabilizing forces in the developmental process He considers ID variables in the framework of cognition, motivation and affect, and introduces factors like “possible selves” to represent individually motivated change over time. If not all IDs studies have focused on inter-individual

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.