Does writing development equal writing quality? A computational investigation of syntactic complexity in L2 learners

被引:162
作者
Crossley, Scott A. [1 ]
McNamara, Danielle S. [2 ]
机构
[1] Georgia State Univ, Dept Appl Linguist ESL, Atlanta, GA 30303 USA
[2] Arizona State Univ, Dept Psychol, Tempe, AZ 85287 USA
关键词
Computational linguistics; L2; writing; Writing development; Writing quality; Syntactic complexity; LEVEL; PROFICIENCY; COHESION; STUDENTS; FEATURES; SPOKEN; TEXT;
D O I
10.1016/j.jslw.2014.09.006
中图分类号
H0 [语言学];
学科分类号
030303 ; 0501 ; 050102 ;
摘要
This study examines second language (L2) syntactic development in conjunction with the effects such development has on human judgments of writing quality (i.e., judgments of both overall writing proficiency and more fine-grained judgments of syntactic proficiency). Essays collected from 57 L2 learners in a longitudinal study were analyzed for growth and scoring patterns using syntactic complexity indices calculated by the computational tool Coh-Metrix. The analyses demonstrate that significant growth in syntactic complexity occurred in the L2 writers as a function of time spent studying English. However, only one of the syntactic feattires that demonstrated growth in the L2 learners was also predictive of human judgments of L2 writing quality. Interpretation of the findings suggest that over the course of a semester, L2 writers produced texts that were increasingly aligned with academic writing (i.e., texts that contain more nouns and phrasal complexity), but that human raters assessed text quality based on structures aligned with spoken discourse (i.e., clausal complexity). Thus, this study finds that the syntactic features that develop in L2 learners may not be the same syntactic features that will assist them in receiving higher evaluations of essay quality. (C) 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:66 / 79
页数:14
相关论文
共 45 条
[11]   Comparing perspectives on L2 writing: Multiple analyses of a common corpus [J].
Connor-Linton, Jeff ;
Polio, Charlene .
JOURNAL OF SECOND LANGUAGE WRITING, 2014, 26 :1-9
[12]   Assessing text readability using cognitively based indices [J].
Crossley, Scott A. ;
Greenfield, Jerry ;
Mcnamara, Danielle S. .
TESOL QUARTERLY, 2008, 42 (03) :475-493
[13]   Predicting second language writing proficiency: the roles of cohesion and linguistic sophistication [J].
Crossley, Scott A. ;
McNamara, Danielle S. .
JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN READING, 2012, 35 (02) :115-135
[14]  
Crossley SA, 2011, LECT NOTES ARTIF INT, V6738, P438, DOI 10.1007/978-3-642-21869-9_62
[15]   The Development of Writing Proficiency as a Function of Grade Level: A Linguistic Analysis [J].
Crossley, Scott A. ;
Weston, Jennifer L. ;
Sullivan, Susan T. McLain ;
McNamara, Danielle S. .
WRITTEN COMMUNICATION, 2011, 28 (03) :282-311
[16]   IMPLICATIONAL UNIVERSALS AND INTERROGATIVE STRUCTURES IN THE INTERLANGUAGE OF ESL LEARNERS [J].
ECKMAN, FR ;
MORAVCSIK, EA ;
WIRTH, JR .
LANGUAGE LEARNING, 1989, 39 (02) :173-205
[17]   Understanding the language demands of schooling: Nouns in academic registers [J].
Fang, Zhihui ;
Schleppegrell, Mary J. ;
Cox, Beverly E. .
JOURNAL OF LITERACY RESEARCH, 2006, 38 (03) :247-273
[18]   LEXICAL AND SYNTACTIC FEATURES OF ESL WRITING BY STUDENTS AT DIFFERENT LEVELS OF L2 PROFICIENCY [J].
FERRIS, DR .
TESOL QUARTERLY, 1994, 28 (02) :414-420
[19]  
Foster P., 1996, STUD SECOND LANG ACQ, V18, P299, DOI [10.1017/S0272263100015047, DOI 10.1017/S0272263100015047]
[20]  
GASS S, 1979, LANG LEARN, V29, P327