Research on Second Language Interactional Com-petence Development from the Perspective of Com-plex Dynamic Systems Theory

Abstract

Amid the growing "complexity turn" in language research paradigms, second lan-guage (L2) interactional competence-characterized by its dynamicity, contextual dependence, and multidimensional coordination-has emerged as a central focus in fields such as second language acquisition, pragmatics, and language assess-ment. While existing studies have yielded valuable insights into language resource allocation, communicative strategy use, and competence evaluation, theoretical frameworks remain underdeveloped, particularly in explaining the nonlinear tra-jectories, system coupling mechanisms, and individual variation pathways that characterize the development of interactional competence. Drawing on Complex Dynamic Systems Theory (CDST) and integrating perspectives from language ecology and social interaction theory, this study proposes a three-tiered model of L2 interactional competence development encompassing the macro, meso, and mi-cro levels. The model articulates key variables, including cultural ideologies, lan-guage policies, social networks, communicative settings, linguistic behaviors, and individual attributes, etc., and explores their dynamic interplay across intertwined spatial and temporal dimensions. By advancing this system-based model, the study seeks to move beyond static and linear explanatory paradigms, offering a more comprehensive understanding of the emergent and evolving nature of L2 interac-tional competence. It also expects to provide theoretical support and practical im-plications for instructional design, competence assessment, and individualized learning trajectory modeling.

Headnote

Abstract

Amid the growing "complexity turn" in language research paradigms, second lan-guage (L2) interactional competence-characterized by its dynamicity, contextual dependence, and multidimensional coordination-has emerged as a central focus in fields such as second language acquisition, pragmatics, and language assess-ment. While existing studies have yielded valuable insights into language resource allocation, communicative strategy use, and competence evaluation, theoretical frameworks remain underdeveloped, particularly in explaining the nonlinear tra-jectories, system coupling mechanisms, and individual variation pathways that characterize the development of interactional competence. Drawing on Complex Dynamic Systems Theory (CDST) and integrating perspectives from language ecology and social interaction theory, this study proposes a three-tiered model of L2 interactional competence development encompassing the macro, meso, and mi-cro levels. The model articulates key variables, including cultural ideologies, lan-guage policies, social networks, communicative settings, linguistic behaviors, and individual attributes, etc., and explores their dynamic interplay across intertwined spatial and temporal dimensions. By advancing this system-based model, the study seeks to move beyond static and linear explanatory paradigms, offering a more comprehensive understanding of the emergent and evolving nature of L2 interac-tional competence. It also expects to provide theoretical support and practical im-plications for instructional design, competence assessment, and individualized learning trajectory modeling.

Keywords

Second language interactional competence; Complex Dynamic Systems Theory (CDST); nonlinear development

1. Introduction

Interactional competence, initially introduced by Kramsch (1986), refers to interlocutors' ability to collaboratively construct, negotiate, and manage meaning through discourse in interaction. With increasing attention to the contex-tual and social dimensions of language use, L2 pragmatics research has gradually shifted from static analyses toward more dynamic explorations of interactional processes (Taguchi & Roever, 2017; Ren, 2018). As an emergent, situ-ated capacity, interactional competence has become one central concept for understanding both language use and learner development in social contexts. Recent studies have examined L2 interactional competence through diverse dimensions such as turn-taking, feedback, pragmatic expression, and identity construction. While these contribu-tions are valuable, many focus on isolated components (Ren et al., 2022) or use variable-based approaches (Wang & Zhang, 2024), lacking a holistic view of how individual, situational, and systemic factors interact. Furthermore, few studies address the nonlinear, emergent nature of interactional development, a key focus of Complex Dynamic Systems Theory (CDST).

L2 interactional competence is shaped by social identity, motivation, cultural background, and emotional states, and unfolds across multiple time scales with characteristics such as nonlinearity, phase transitions, and self-organi-zation (Lü & Ren, 2024). CDST, introduced into SLA by Larsen-Freeman and Cameron (2008), offers a powerful lens for theorizing such complex, adaptive systems. This study aims to integrate CDST with interactional compe-tence research, proposing a systematic, multilevel model of development. By emphasizing dynamic coupling across macro-, meso-, and micro-levels, the model seeks to enrich our understanding of interactional competence and offer a flexible framework for future theoretical and empirical work.

2. Research on the Application of CDST in L2 Acquisition

CDST conceptualizes language development as the product of nested, evolving, and coupled interactions among multiple dimensions in time and space (de Bot et al., 2007; Larsen-Freeman, 2012). Rejecting linear causality, CDST emphasizes the ecological interdependence between learners and their environments (Du, 2021), viewing language learning as an adaptive system (Larsen-Freeman, 1997).

Over the past two decades, CDST has informed research across a wide range of L2 domains-speaking (Yu & Lowie, 2020), writing (Zheng, 2018), motivation (Liu, 2024), well-being (Xu, 2024), and learner agency (Johnson, 2019; Qin & Xu, 2024)-broadening applied linguistics' theoretical scope. In pragmatics, CDST has proven par-ticularly insightful. Li and Gao (2017) demonstrated that learners' request strategies emerge from the dynamic co-ordination of pragmatic knowledge, social relations, and task demands. Ren (2018) further illustrated how differing social networks shape divergent developmental trajectories, highlighting CDST's relevance to L2 pragmatics through the notion of "soft assembly".

Despite these contributions, research on L2 interactional competence often remains grounded in linear models or isolated variables, lacking a system-level account of interaction as a complex phenomenon. CDST, in contrast, offers an integrative and temporally sensitive framework for capturing the emergent, adaptive, and self-organizing nature of language use. As Li and Ren (2020) argue, incorporating both pragmatic and interactional competence within a CDST framework helps to uncover the multidimensional coordination involved in real-time communication and offers a more accurate portrayal of learners' competence construction in context. Building on these insights, the present study synthesizes L2 interactional research and CDST to propose a dynamic multilevel model of interac-tional development.

3. A Complex Systems Model of L2 Interactional Competence Development

This study proposes a three-tiered system model of L2 interactional competence development within the framework of CDST, integrating insights from language ecology and social interaction theory (see Figure 1). The model builds on the ecological perspective of Douglas Fir Group (2016) and the multidimensional framework of Ren (2019), viewing language development as the result of dynamic, nonlinear interactions among macro-, meso-, and micro-level subsystems across time and space.

Figure 1. A Complex Systems Model of L2 Interactional Competence Development.

3.1 Macro-level Construction

The macro level addresses how structural external forces, such as cultural ideologies, language policies, economic systems, and power structures, shape the development of L2 interactional competence. Language is not merely a tool for individual communication but a socially situated practice embedded in ideological and institutional frame-works (Fairclough, 1992). These structures construct what is considered "appropriate" or "legitimate" communica-tion, shaping learners' interactional repertoires through the internalization of dominant discourses mediated by in-stitutions like education, media, and public policy. Cultural expectations around politeness, directness, or assertive-ness vary across contexts, influencing learners' expressive strategies. For example, English-speaking settings may favor direct, agentive communication, whereas learners from cultures valuing modesty and indirectness may face psychological or pragmatic dissonance when adapting to contrasting norms. These cultural mismatches highlight the role of macro-level ideologies in regulating learners' interactional orientations and strategic choices.

Language policies and educational systems further determine access to linguistic resources and socialization pathways. National language planning shapes curricular priorities, assessment standards, and resource distribution, directly affecting the type and quality of input learners receive. Monolingual-oriented policies may restrict multi-lingual development, while those promoting intercultural competence better support holistic interactional growth. Similarly, economic globalization reshapes the distribution of linguistic capital, compelling learners to adapt strat-egies and identities in increasingly multilingual, cross-cultural environments, thereby fostering intercultural com-municative competence.

Crucially, macro-level influence is not unidirectional. Learners are active agents who negotiate, resist, or trans-form dominant norms through language use, discourse strategies, and identity performances. This dialectic between structure and agency introduces complexity into the developmental process. For instance, L2 learners in global English contexts may both conform to "standard English" norms and infuse their speech with culturally rooted elements, constructing hybrid communicative styles that challenge fixed notions of linguistic authority. In doing so, they contribute to the evolving definitions of legitimate English use.

In summary, the macro level provides not only the institutional and ideological backdrop for L2 interactional development but also participates actively in shaping learners' communicative behaviors, identity positioning, and orientation toward linguistic norms. Its impact is mediated by learners' agentive responses, resulting in dynamic, bidirectional processes that co-construct what counts as interactionally competent behavior in diverse sociocultural settings.

3.2 Meso-level Construction

The meso level centers on learners' immediate social networks and interactional environments, such as families, schools, workplaces, peer groups, and other community affiliations. Unlike the macro level's structural constraints, the meso level emphasizes the situated nature of language use and the role of socialization in shaping interactional competence. Learners internalize and reproduce pragmatic norms, communicative patterns, and strategic behaviors through ongoing participation in specific sociocultural contexts. Interactional competence at this level develops through socially mediated language practice. Engagement in various communities enables learners to acquire not only pragmatic resources but also localized norms of discourse and identity performance. For instance, familial settings may encourage affective expression and informal address, while classrooms often promote formal language and hierarchical turn-taking, while professional domains prioritize task-focused, accurate, and role-sensitive com-munication. These settings shape learners' strategic repertoire, pragmatic awareness, and turn management skills.

Simultaneously, learners navigate multiple social identities, student, peer, employee, and second language user, adjusting their linguistic behavior in line with community expectations and interactional goals. Language thus func-tions as a tool for both communication and identity negotiation. The frequency and complexity of such identity shifts impact learners' adaptive capacity and strategic flexibility.

Power dynamics and participation structures within communities also influence access to meaningful interaction. For example, teacher-fronted classrooms may restrict learners to passive roles, limiting their pragmatic agency, while peer collaboration or project-based learning can expand opportunities for discourse participation and strategic development. The quality of interactional input depends not only on its quantity but also on whether the communi-cative environment supports diverse, authentic, and equitable engagement.

Thus, the meso level serves as both the arena for social practice and the locus of identity construction. It mediates how learners internalize discourse norms, perform social roles, and adjust communicative strategies in response to shifting contexts. The inherently situated, dynamic, and relational nature of this level underscores the emergent and context-dependent characteristics of L2 interactional competence. It also reveals that developmental trajectories are not uniform, but contingent on the affordances, constraints, and identity negotiations embedded in learners' day-to-day social experiences.

3.3 Micro-level Construction

The micro level focuses on learners' real-time linguistic performance, strategic deployment, and cognitive regula-tion during communicative events, reflecting interactional competence as a complex adaptive system. This level comprises two key dimensions: interactional behavior, which involves language use, turn-taking, strategy selection, emotion regulation, feedback, and discourse construction, and individual characteristics, which include personality traits, language proficiency, emotional states, motivation, and metapragmatic awareness. These dimensions repre-sent the learner's capacity to integrate linguistic and non-linguistic resources and guide their responses to interac-tional contexts.

In authentic communication, cognitive processing, emotional experience, pragmatic judgment, and strategic op-erations are tightly coupled, working in an integrated manner. Learners must adjust rapidly to shifting turn sequences, emotional cues, semantic ambiguities, and situational contexts, demonstrating environmental sensitivity and adap-tive responsiveness. Interactional competence emerges from the synergy of multiple factors, showing nonlinear change, self-organizing dynamics, and individual variability. For example, a learner may adopt different strategies and interaction styles in formal and casual settings, influenced by emotional state, motivation, topic familiarity, and cognitive load.

To capture the dynamic evolution of competence at this level, this study incorporates the interplay of time and space (Duff, 2019). Temporally, early language exposure and formative experiences shape learners' subsequent preferences and perceptions, resulting in developmental patterns that include leaps, progression, and regressions. Spatially, learners' language practices adapt to changes in geographic environments, discourse contexts, and media. For instance, studying abroad or transitioning between academic and informal settings requires adjustments in lin-guistic norms, identity positioning, and pragmatic routines. The interaction between temporal and spatial factors fosters an adaptable system in which L2 interactional competence evolves through continuous flux, recalibration, and individualized trajectories. Consequently, the proposed three-tiered system operates dynamically, forming a multilevel adaptive framework in which external sociocultural structures and internal language-cognition mecha-nisms co-regulate and shape the development of L2 competence.

What's more, learners' competence may undergo phase transitions due to critical events, such as cross-cultural conflicts or communicative failures, leading to structural shifts in strategies and metapragmatic awareness. Con-versely, environments lacking support may result in stagnation or strategic fossilization. Internal and external ten-sions, such as identity pressure or cognitive overload, can influence the system's function, generating inter-individ-ual and intra-individual variation. Learners' diverse backgrounds and experiences lead to heterogeneous develop-mental pathways, with individual variability across time and contexts.

Thus, language development is not a linear progression but a nonlinear system shaped by interacting factors. A holistic perspective on the interplay between societal structures, community contexts, and individual attributes of-fers a more accurate understanding of interactional competence, providing theoretical support for designing cultur-ally responsive language education frameworks.

4. Conclusion

This study conceptualizes the development of L2 interactional competence as a complex, multi-level, and adaptive process shaped by dynamic interaction among interdependent subsystems. Traditional static paradigms are insuffi-cient to capture its core features, such as emergence, nonlinearity, and multi-pathway development. Drawing on Complex Dynamic Systems Theory (CDST), this research argues for its theoretical validity and methodological feasibility in applied linguistics. By integrating the Douglas Fir Group's (2016) socio-ecological model and Ren's (2019) interactional framework, the study proposes a CDST-based model spanning macro-, meso-, and micro-levels, which highlights key variables and cross-level interactions, emphasizing principles of self-organization and path dependence.

Importantly, CDST serves not as a prescriptive theory but as a dynamic analytical platform. Future research should employ longitudinal designs, multimodal analysis, and data-driven modeling to explore subsystem coupling and adaptive trajectories. Further empirical refinement of the model's structures will deepen our understanding of interactional development and expand the theoretical and methodological scope of SLA research.

References

References

De Bot, K., Lowie, W., & Verspoor, M. (2007). A dynamic systems theory approach to second language acquisition. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 10(1), 7-21.

Douglas Fir Group. (2016). A transdisciplinary framework for SLA in a multilingual world. The Modern Language Journal, 100(Sup-plement), 19-47.

Du, X. (2021). Understanding high school EFL teachers' learning from the perspective of complex dynamic systems theory [Doctoral dissertation, Beijing Foreign Studies University]. CNKI.

Duff, P. A. (2019). Social dimensions and processes in second language acquisition: Multilingual socialization in transnational contexts. The Modern Language Journal, 103(1), 6-22.

Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and social change. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Johnson, K. (2019). Digital technology as a tool to support children and educators as co-learners. Global Studies of Childhood, 9(4), 1-12.

Kramsch, C. (1986). From language proficiency to interactional competence. The Modern Language Journal, 70(4), 366-372.

Larsen-Freeman, D. (1997). Chaos/complexity science and second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 18(2), 141-165.

Larsen-Freeman, D. (2012). Complex, dynamic systems: A new transdisciplinary theme for applied linguistics. Language Teaching, 45(2), 202-214.

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

Li, C., & Gao, X. (2017). Bridging "what I said" and "why I said it": The role of metapragmatic awareness in L2 request performance. Language Awareness, 26(3), 170-190.

Li, C., & Ren, W. (2020). The Complex Dynamic Systems Theory and second language pragmatic development research. Journal of Foreign Languages, 43(3), 46-54.

Liu, M. (2024). Ought-to multilingual self: A contextualized motivational construct and its longitudinal effects in Chinese foreign language learners. Foreign Languages and Their Teaching, 4, 104-116, 150.

Lü, X., & Ren, W. (2024). Research trends and prospects on interaction skills of second language learners. Foreign Language Educa-tion, 45(5), 60-66.

Qin, L., & Xu, J. (2024). Exploring the conceptual model of foreign language learners' agency and its application in the technology-integrated educational context. Foreign Languages in China, 21(1), 83-91.

Ren, W. (2018). Developing L2 pragmatic competence in study abroad contexts. In C. Sanz & A. Morales-Front (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of study abroad research and practice (pp. 119-133). New York: Routledge.

Ren, W. (2019). Pragmatic development of Chinese during study abroad: A cross-sectional study of learner requests. Journal of Prag-matics, 146, 1-13.

Ren, W., Wu, Y., & Peng, Y. (2022). The effects of task complexity and task sequence on Chinese students' English interactive listening. Foreign Languages and Their Teaching, 4, 99-110, 149.

Taguchi, N., & Roever, C. (2017). Second language pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Wang, H., & Zhang, L. (2024). Constructing a framework for assessing online spoken interactional competence: Insights from CET-4 and CET-6 oral tests. Foreign Language World, (5), 55-63.

Xu, J. (2024). Construction of a well-being model for English learner: A qualitative investigation based on the English learning expe-riences of Chinese students. Foreign Languages Bimonthly, 47(1), 56-66, 159.

Yu, H., & Lowie, W. (2020). Dynamic paths of complexity and accuracy in second language speech: A longitudinal case study of Chinese learners. Applied Linguistics, 41(6), 855-877.

Zheng, Y. (2018). The multidimensional development of advanced learners' linguistic complexity. Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 50(2), 218-229, 320.