Evidence-based answer · Last updated · How it’s made
In socioconstructionist and other non-mainstream ("alternative" or "post-social-turn") SLA approaches, language is not treated as a fixed mental grammar residing inside an individual's head, but as a dynamic set of semiotic resources that people use jointly, in real time, to accomplish social actions and make meaning together. Rather than a stable "system" to be internalized, language is seen as fluid, distributed across people and their environment, shaped by and shaping the social, cultural, and historical contexts in which it is used, and continuously (re)produced through interaction rather than existing as a finished product.
Answered for language learning in general. No specific language was set for this question, so the findings are drawn from general second-language research rather than one language’s literature.
One source explicitly argues language should not be conceived as having an 'end state' to be reached; instead, any instance of language use is an assembling of resources by a person or group, not the deployment of a pre-existing, complete linguistic system.1
Non-mainstream SLA researchers propose swapping out traditional cognitive-SLA vocabulary — 'competence' (a person's internal knowledge of a language) and 'grammar' — for terms like repertoire, semiotic resources, and register, because these better capture how language knowledge is actually built moment-to-moment through usage and interaction.4
In plain terms
The translanguaging perspective, closely aligned with socioconstructionist thinking, defines language not as a set of separate, named languages ('English,' 'Spanish') but as a single, unbounded repertoire of features that speakers draw on strategically depending on context; 'languaging' is framed as an ongoing process of meaning-making rather than a fixed product.2,8
Example
From this perspective, the meaning of an utterance is not simply decoded from its grammar and vocabulary; it depends on the social and cultural context, the relationship between speakers, and what action the utterance is meant to accomplish.9
Example
Several non-mainstream and multilingual-turn perspectives criticize mainstream SLA for implicitly defining language against an idealized monolingual native speaker, and instead argue language should be understood as inherently multilingual, repertoire-based, and unequally distributed across social groups (an issue of social justice, not just cognition).6,7,12
If you're trying to apply these ideas practically, the biggest shift is to stop thinking of a language as a fixed rulebook to master and start treating it as a living set of resources you build up through real use with real people. Concretely: prioritize immersion and conversation practice where language is used to actually get things done (ordering food, solving a task, telling a story), rather than only drilling isolated grammar rules; embrace flexible use of your existing languages (translanguaging) instead of treating them as strictly separate systems, especially if you're multilingual; and value language exchange or tutoring relationships where meaning is negotiated collaboratively, since these theories emphasize that language competence develops through social, mediated interaction, not solitary memorization. Structured grammar lessons aren't ruled out, but these frameworks suggest they matter most when connected to genuine, contextualized language use rather than treated as an end in themselves.
Now pick something to do it with
Each of these opens an overview of the apps, courses and immersion material worth a look for that — filtered to exactly what the advice above points you at:
Or see the full resource list