دانشگاه الزهرا

  اخبار و اعلانات

 آمار

تعداد نشریات25
تعداد شماره‌ها939
تعداد مقالات7,735
تعداد مشاهده مقاله12,724,586
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله9,066,170
Esfandiari, Rajab, Ahmadi, Mohammad. (1403). Syntactic Complexity in Novice and Expert L2 Academic Writing: The Role of Syntactic Elaboration and Diversity. جلوه هنر, 8(1), 115-138. doi: 10.22051/lghor.2023.43081.1780
Rajab Esfandiari; Mohammad Ahmadi. "Syntactic Complexity in Novice and Expert L2 Academic Writing: The Role of Syntactic Elaboration and Diversity". جلوه هنر, 8, 1, 1403, 115-138. doi: 10.22051/lghor.2023.43081.1780
Esfandiari, Rajab, Ahmadi, Mohammad. (1403). 'Syntactic Complexity in Novice and Expert L2 Academic Writing: The Role of Syntactic Elaboration and Diversity', جلوه هنر, 8(1), pp. 115-138. doi: 10.22051/lghor.2023.43081.1780
Esfandiari, Rajab, Ahmadi, Mohammad. Syntactic Complexity in Novice and Expert L2 Academic Writing: The Role of Syntactic Elaboration and Diversity. جلوه هنر, 1403; 8(1): 115-138. doi: 10.22051/lghor.2023.43081.1780

Syntactic Complexity in Novice and Expert L2 Academic Writing: The Role of Syntactic Elaboration and Diversity

Journal of Language Horizons
مقاله 5، دوره 8، شماره 1 - شماره پیاپی 19، شهریور 2024، صفحه 115-138    اصل مقاله (442.14 K)
نوع مقاله: Research article
شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22051/lghor.2023.43081.1780
نویسندگان
Rajab Esfandiari* 1؛ Mohammad Ahmadi2
1Department of English Language Teaching, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin, Iran
2Department of English Language, Faculty of Humanities, Lorestan University, Khorramabad, Iran
چکیده
Syntactic complexity (SC) is an important construct for gauging L2 writing proficiency. Previous studies, including Biber et al. (2016) and Dong et al. (2023), have largely focused on syntactic elaboration and disregarded syntactic diversity. This study investigates how academic writing proficiency is associated with SC, through an evaluation of both the variety and elaboration of sentence structures. To that end, a corpus of the abstract sections of MA theses, PhD dissertations, and empirical research articles in applied linguistics produced by Iranian English medium academic writers was compiled. Drawing on automated text analysis tools (Stanford Core NLP and L2 SC analyzer), we measured syntactic elaboration and diversity of the texts written by three distinct sets of academic authors. The results indicated that phrasal and global measures of syntactic elaboration significantly predicted academic writing proficiency in both novice and expert writers. The results of the second phase of the study indicated that the incorporation of syntactic diversity measure considerably increased the predictive power of the model. The pedagogical implications of the findings for academic writing instruction through consciousness-raising activities for both novice and expert writers are discussed.
کلیدواژه‌ها
academic writing؛ expert and novice writing؛ syntactic diversity؛ syntactic elaboration؛ syntactic complexity
عنوان مقاله [English]
پیچیدگی نحوی در نوشتار علمی مبتدی و متخصص در زبان دوم: نقش بسط و تنوع نحوی
نویسندگان [English]
رجب اسفندیاری1؛ محمد احمدی2
1دانشیار آموزش زبان انگلیسی، دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی، دانشگاه بین المللی امام خمینی، قزوین، ایران
2استادیار آموزش زبان انگلیسی، دانشکدة علوم انسانی، دانشگاه لرستان، خرم‌آباد، ایران
چکیده [English]
پیچیدگی نحوی یک ساختار مهم برای سنجش مهارت نوشتاری در زبان دوم است. پژوهش‌های پیشین، از جمله بایبر و همکاران (2016) و دونگ و همکاران (2023) ، تا اندازة زیادی بر بسط نحوی تمرکز کرده اند و تنوع نحوی را نادیده گرفته‌اند. این مطالعه چگونگی ارتباط مهارت نوشتاری دانشگاهی با پیچیدگی نحوی را از طریق ارزیابی تنوع و بسط ساختار جمله بررسی می‌کند. به‌همین‌منظور در این مطالعه پیکره‌ای زبانی تهیه شد که مجموعه‌ای از بخش‌های چکیده پایان‌نامه‌های کارشناسی ارشد، رساله‌های دکتری و مقاله‌های پژوهشی در زبان‌شناسی کاربردی نویسندگان دانشگاهی ایرانی را در خود جای می‌داد. با استفاده از ابزارهای خودکار تجزیه و تحلیل متن (استنفورد Core NLP و تحلیلگرL2 SC )، بسط نحوی و تنوع نحوی متون نوشته‌شده توسط سه مجموعه جداگانه از نویسندگان دانشگاهی مورد سنجش قرار گرفت. نتایج نشان داد که معیارهای عبارتی و کلی بسط نحوی به‌طور معناداری مهارت نوشتاری دانشگاهی را در نویسندگان مبتدی و متخصص پیش‌بینی می‌کند. یافته‌های مرحله دوم پژوهش نشان داد که گنجاندن معیار تنوع نحوی به‌طور چشمگیری قدرت پیش بینی مدل را افزایش می‌دهد. مفاهیم آموزشی یافته‌ها برای آموزش نگارش دانشگاهی از طریق فعالیت‌های افزایش آگاهی برای نویسندگان مبتدی و متخصص مورد بحث قرار گرفته‌است.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
نوشتار دانشگاهی, نوشتار متخصص و مبتدی, تنوع نحوی, بسط نحوی, پیچیدگی نحوی
مراجع
  1. Ansarifar, A., Shahriari, H., & Pishghadam, R. (2018). Phrasal complexity in academic writing: A comparison of abstracts written by graduate students and expert writers in applied linguistics. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 31(1), 58-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2017.12.008
  2. Azadnia, M., Lotfi, A., & Biria, R. (2019). A study of SC via Coh-metrix: Similarities and differences of Ph. D. dissertations written by Iranian university students and English native speakers. Research in English Language Pedagogy, 7(2), 232-254. https://doi.org/10.30486/relp.2018.663453
  3. Beers, S. F., & Nagy, W. E. (2009). SC as a predictor of adolescent writing quality: Which measures? Which genre? Reading and Writing, 22(2), 185-200. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-007-9107-5
  4. Bi, P., & Jiang, J. (2020). SC in assessing young adolescent EFL learners’ writings: Syntactic elaboration and diversity. System, 91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102248
  5. Biber, D., & Gray, B. (2016). Grammatical complexity in academic English: Linguistic change in writing. Cambridge University Press.
  6. Biber, D., Gray, B., & Poonpon, K. (2011). Should we use characteristics of conversation to measure grammatical complexity in L2 writing development? TESOL Quarterly, 45(1), 5-35. https://doi.org/10.5054/tq.2011.244483
  7. Biber, D., Gray, B., & Staples, S. (2016). Predicting patterns of grammatical complexity across language exam task types and proficiency levels. Applied Linguistics, 37(5), 639-667. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amu059
  8. Biber, D., Gray, B., Staples, S., & Egbert, J. (2020). Investigating grammatical complexity in L2 English writing research: Linguistic description versus predictive measurement. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 46, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2020.100869
  9. Bulté, B., & Housen, A. (2012). Defining and operationalizing L2 complexity. In A. Housen, F. Kuiken, & I. Vedder (Eds.), Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency: Complexity, accuracy and fluency in SLA (pp. 21-46). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
  10. Bulté, B., & Housen, A. (2014). Conceptualizing and measuring short-term changes in L2 writing complexity. Journal of Second Language Writing, 26(1), 42-65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2014.09.005
  11. Bulté, B., & Housen, A. (2018). SC in L2 writing: Individual pathways and emerging group trends. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 28(1), 147-164. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12196
  12. Casal, J. E., & Lee, J. J. (2019). SC and writing quality in assessed first-year L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 44, 51-62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2019.03.005
  13. Casal, J. E., Lu, X., Qiu, X., Wang, Y., & Zhang, G. (2021). SC across academic research article part-genres: A cross-disciplinary perspective. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2021.100996
  14. Casanave, C. P. (1994). Language development in students' journals. Journal of Second Language Writing, 3(3), 179-201. https://doi.org/10.1016/1060-3743(94)90016-7
  15. Chen, D., & Manning, C. D. (2014). A fast and accurate dependency parser using neural networks. In Y. Marton (Ed.), The 2014 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing (pp. 740-750). Association for computational linguistics.
  16. Connor-Linton, J., & Amoroso, L. (Eds.). (2014). Measured language: Quantitative studies of acquisition, assessment, and variation. Georgetown University Press.
  17. Crossley, S. A., & McNamara, D. S. (2010). Cohesion, coherence, and expert evaluations of writing proficiency. In Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (Vol. 32, No. 32).
  18. Crossley, S. A., & McNamara, D. S. (2014). Does writing development equal writing quality? A computational investigation of SC in L2 learners. Journal of Second Language Writing, 26(1), 66-79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2014.09.006
  19. De Clercq, B., & Housen, A. (2017). A cross‐linguistic perspective on SC in L2 development: Syntactic elaboration and diversity. The Modern Language Journal, 101(2), 315-334. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12396
  20. De Marneffe, M. C., & Manning, C. D. (2008). Stanford typed dependencies manual (pp. 338-345). Technical report, Stanford University.
  21. De Marneffe, M. C., & Nivre, J. (2019). Dependency grammar. Annual Review of Linguistics, 5, 197-218. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-linguistics-011718-011842
  22. Dong, J., Wang, H., & Buckingham, L. (2023). Mapping out the disciplinary variation of SC in student academic writing. System, 113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2022.102974
  23. Esfandiari, R., & Ahmadi, M. (2021). Syntactic complexity measures and academic writing proficiency: A corpus-based study of professional and students' prose. Journal of Asia TEFL, 18(3), 745-763. http://dx.doi.org/10.18823/asiatefl.2021.18.3.1.745
  24. Hyland, K. (2000). Disciplinary discourses: Social interactions in academic writing. Longman.
  25. Karami, M., & Salahshoor, F. (2014). The relative significance of lexical richness and SC as predictors of academic reading performance. International Journal of Research Studies in Language Learning, 3(2), 17-28. http://doi.org/10.5861/ijrsll.2013.477
  26. Kemper, S., Herman, R. E., Lian, C. H. T., & Liu, Y. (2003). Age differences in sentence production. Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences, 58(5), 260-268. http://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/58.5.p260
  27. Kreyer, R., & Schaub, S. (2018). The development of phrasal complexity in German intermediate learners of English. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research, 4(1), 82-111. https://doi.org/10.1075/ijlcr.16011.kre
  28. Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2012). Syntactic complexity, lexical variation and accuracy as a function of task complexity and proficiency level in L2 writing and speaking. In A. Housen, F. Kuiken, & I. Vedder (Eds.), Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency: Complexity, accuracy and fluency in SLA (pp. 143-170). John Benjamins.
  29. Kyle, K (2016). Measuring syntactic development in L2 writing: Fine grained indices of SC and usage-based indices of SC sophistication [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Georgia State University. doi: https://doi.org/10.57709/8501051
  30. Kyle, K., & Crossley, S. A. (2018). Measuring syntactic complexity in L2 writing using fine‐grained clausal and phrasal indices. The Modern Language Journal, 102(2), 333-349. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12468
  31. Kyle, K., Crossley, S., & Verspoor, M. (2021). Measuring longitudinal writing development using indices of SC and sophistication. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 43(4), 781-812. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263120000546
  32. Larsen-Freeman, D. (2006). The emergence of complexity, fluency, and accuracy in the oral and written production of five Chinese learners of English. Applied Linguistics, 27(4), 590-619. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/aml029
  33. Larsen-Freeman, D. (2009). Adjusting expectations: The study of complexity, accuracy, and fluency in second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 579-589. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp043
  34. Larsson, T., Reppen, R., & Dixon, T. (2022). A phraseological study of highlighting strategies in novice and expert writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2022.101179
  35. Lennon, P. (1990). Investigating fluency in EFL: A quantitative approach. Language Learning, 40(3), 387-417. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1990.tb00669.x
  36. Leonard, L. B., Weismer, S. E., Miller, C. A., Francis, D. J., Tomblin, J. B., & Kail, R. V. (2007). Speed of processing, working memory, and language impairment in children. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 50(2), 408-428.
  37. Li, Y., Lin, S., Liu, Y., & Lu, X. (2023). The predictive powers of fine-grained syntactic complexity indices for letter writing proficiency and their relationship to pragmatic appropriateness. Assessing Writing, 56, 100707. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2023.100707
  38. Liu, L., & Li, L. (2016). Noun phrase complexity in EFL academic writing: A corpus-based study of postgraduate academic writing. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 13(1), 48-65. http://dx.doi.org/10.18823/asiatefl.2016.13.1.4.48
  39. Liu, X., & Koirala, H. (2012). Ordinal regression analysis: Using generalized ordinal logistic regression models to estimate educational data. Journal of Modern Applied Statistical Methods, 11(1), 242-254.
  40. Long, J. S., & Freese, J. (2006). Regression models for categorical dependent variables using Stata (Vol. 7). Stata press.
  41. Lu, X. (2009). Automatic measurement of syntactic complexity in child language acquisition. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 14(1), 3-28. https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.14.1.02lu
  42. Lu, X. (2011). A corpus‐based evaluation of syntactic complexity measures as indices of college‐level ESL writers' language development. TESOL Quarterly, 45(1), 36-62. https://doi.org/10.5054/tq.2011.240859
  43. Lu, X., & Ai, H. (2015). Syntactic complexity in college-level English writing: Differences among writers with diverse L1 backgrounds. Journal of Second Language Writing, 29(1), 16-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2015.06.003
  44. Mansourizadeh, K., & Ahmad, U. K. (2011). Citation practices among non-native expert and novice scientific writers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 10(3), 152-161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2011.03.004
  45. Miestamo, M., Sinnemäki, K., & Karlsson, F. (Eds.). (2021). The handbook of dependency linguistics. John Wiley & Sons.
  46. Mohamadi Zenouzagh, Z. (2020). Syntactic complexity in individual, collaborative and E-collaborative EFL writing: mediating role of writing modality, L1 and sustained development in focus. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(6), 2939-2970. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09818-w
  47. Naserpour, A., Zarei, A., & Esfandiari, R. (2020). The effects of task orientation and involvement load on learning collocations. Teaching English as a Second Language Quarterly, 39(1), 71-114. https://doi.org/10.22099/jtls.2020.37032.2809
  48. Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2009). Towards an organic approach to investigating CAF in instructed SLA: The case of complexity. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 555-578. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp044
  49. Ortega, L. (2003). Syntactic complexity measures and their relationship to L2 proficiency: A research synthesis of college‐level L2 writing. Applied Linguistics, 24(4), 492-518. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/24.4.492
  50. Osborne, J. W. (2017). Regression and linear modeling: Best practices and modern methods. SAGE Publishing.
  51. Parkinson, J., & Musgrave, J. (2014). Development of noun phrase complexity in the writing of English for Academic Purposes students. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 14(1), 48-59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2013.12.001
  52. Perry, S. (2020). Ordinal logistic regression models and statistical software: What you need to know. Cornell statistical consulting unit. https://cscu.cornell.edu/wp-content/uploads/91_ ordlogistic.pdf
  53. Pituch, K. A., & Stevens, J. P. (2015). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences: Analyses with SAS and IBM’s SPSS. Routledge.
  54. Römer, U., & Arbor, A. (2009). English in academia: Does nativeness matter. Anglistik: International Journal of English Studies, 20(2), 89-100.
  55. Ruan, Z. (2018). Structural compression in academic writing: An English-Chinese comparison study of complex noun phrases in research article abstracts. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 36(1), 37-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2018.09.001
  56. Scott, M., & Tribble, C. (2006). Textual patterns: Key words and corpus analysis in language education (Vol. 22). John Benjamins Publishing.
  57. Shadloo, F., Shahriari Ahmadi, H., & Ghonsooly, B. (2017). Exploring grammatical complexity across proficiency levels in argumentative essays by Iranian EFL learners. Language and Translation Studies (LTS), 49(4), 61-75.  https://doi.org/10.22067/lts.v49i4.61672
  58. Skehan, P. (1998). Task-based instruction. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 18, 268-286. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190500003585
  59. Staples, S., & Reppen, R. (2016). Understanding first-year L2 writing: A lexico-grammatical analysis across L1s, genres, and language ratings. Journal of Second Language Writing, 32, 17-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2016.02.002
  60. Staples, S., Egbert, J., Biber, D., & Gray, B. (2016). Academic writing development at the university level: Phrasal and clausal complexity across level of study, discipline, and genre. Written Communication, 33(2), 149-183. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088316631527
  61. Valizadeh, M., & Soltanpour, F. (2021). Focused direct corrective feedback: Effects on the elementary English learners’ written SC. Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 7(1), 132-150. https://doi.org/10.32601/ejal.911207
  62. Verspoor, M., Schmid, M. S., & Xu, X. (2012). A dynamic usage-based perspective on L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(3), 239-263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2012.03.007
  63. Wolfe-Quintero, K., Inagaki, S., & Kim, H. (1998). Second language development in writing: Measures of fluency, accuracy and complexity. University of Hawaii at Manoa.
  64. Yazdani, S. (2018). Syntactic complexity in Iranian learners' English writing and speaking. Journal on English as a Foreign Language, 8(1), 75-96. http://e-journal.iain-palangkaraya.ac.id/index.php/jefl
  65. Yoon, H. J., & Polio, C. (2017). The linguistic development of students of English as a second language in two written genres. TESOL Quarterly, 51(2), 275-301. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.296
  66. Youn, S. J. (2014). Measuring syntactic complexity in L2 pragmatic production: Investigating relationships among pragmatics, grammar, and proficiency. System, 42, 270-287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.12.008
  67. Zheng, B., & Agresti, A. (2000). Summarizing the predictive power of a generalized linear model. Statistics in Medicine, 19(13), 1771-1781. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0258(20000715)19:13<1771::AID-SIM485>3.0.CO;2-P
آمار
تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 302
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 332


سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی. طراحی و پیاده سازی از سیناوب