Mots-clés
syntactic complexity
lexical complexity
rage semester growth rate (ASGR)
longitudinal learner corpus
L2 writing
Polish upper secondary school, the sixth form college
Comment citer
Résumé
The article is devoted to the development of language complexity in a relatively under-researched area of adolescent writing from the point of view of Complex Dynamic Systems Theory (CDST). It describes the second part of a panel study which aimed to examine the relationships among the average semester growth rates (ASGRs) of specific measures of syntactic and lexical complexity within and between these two subsystems in writing in English as a foreign language at the secondary school level. The study involved the analysis of The Written English Developmental Corpus of Polish Learners (WEDCPL). The corpus, which comprises over 1900 essays, was created on the basis of 21 repeated measurements conducted in a group of 100 secondary school learners during a period of three years. With respect to the specific measures of syntactic and lexical complexity, the study indicated that nominalization developed faster than subordination and coordination, and that lexical variation developed faster than lexical density and sophistication per semester. Moreover, the relationships between the ASGRs of both syntactic and lexical measures were more supportive within than between the subsystems. The main pedagogical implication for English language teachers refers to fostering more coordinated development of language complexity at secondary school in the EFL context.
Références
Bax S. (2012), Text Inspector. Online Text Analysis Tool. https://textinspector.com [Accessed 23.06.2020]
Bulté B., Housen A. (2012), Defining and operationalising L2 complexity, (in:) Housen A., Kuiken F., Vedder I. (eds.), Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency: Complexity, accuracy and fluency in SLA. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 21–46. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.32.02bul
Bulté B., Housen A. (2014), Conceptualizing and measuring short-term changes in L2 writing complexity. „Journal of Second Language Writing”, Vol. 26, pp. 42–65. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2014.09.005
Bulté B., Housen A. (2018), Syntactic complexity in L2 writing: Individual pathways and emerging group trends. „International Journal of Applied Linguistics”, Vol. 28, pp. 147–164. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12196
Caspi T. (2010), A Dynamic perspective on second language development. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Groningen, Netherlands.
Hemchua S., Schmitt N. (2006), An analysis of lexical errors in the English compositions of Thai learners. „Prospect”, Vol 21, pp. 3–25.
Hiver P., Al-Hoorie A. (2020), Research methods for complexity theory in applied linguistics. London: Multilingual Matters. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21832/9781788925754
Housen A., Kuiken F., Vedder I. (2012), Complexity, accuracy and fluency: Definitions, measurement and research, (in:) Housen A., Kuiken F., Vedder I. (eds.), Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency: Complexity, accuracy and fluency in SLA. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 1–20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.32.01hou
Hou J., Loerts H., Verspoor M. (2020), Coordination of linguistic subsystems as a sign of automatization?, (in:) Fogal G., Verspoor M. (eds.), Complex dynamic systems theory and L2 writing development. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 27–48. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.54.02hou
Inoue Ch. (2016), A comparative study of the variables used to measure syntactic complexity and accuracy in task-based research. „The Language Learning Journal”, Vol. 44, pp. 487–505. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2015.1130079
Knoch U., Rouhshad A., Storch N. (2014), Does the writing of undergraduate ESL students develop after one year of study in an English-medium university? „Assessing Writing”, Vol. 21, pp. 1–17. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2014.01.001
Lambert C., Kormos J. (2014), Complexity, accuracy, and fluency in task-based L2 research: Toward more developmentally based measures of second language acquisition. „Applied Linguistics”, Vol. 35, pp. 607–614. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amu047
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”, Vol. 27, pp. 590–616. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/aml029
Larsen-Freeman D., Cameron L. (2008), Complex systems and applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lowie W., Verspoor M. (2019), Individual differences and the ergodicity problem. „Language Learning”, Vol. 69, pp. 184–206. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12324
Lowie W. et al. (2017), Finding the key to successful L2 learning in groups and individuals. „Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching”, Vol. 7, pp. 127–148. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2017.7.1.7
Lu X. (2010), Automatic analysis of syntactic complexity in second language writing. „International Journal of Corpus Linguistics”, Vol. 15, pp. 474–496. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.15.4.02lu
Lu X. (2012), The relationship of lexical richness to the quality of ESL learners’ oral narratives. „The Modern Language Journal”, Vol. 96, pp. 190–208. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2011.01232_1.x
Norris J., Ortega L. (2009), Towards an organic approach to investigating CAF in instructed SLA: The case of complexity. „Applied Linguistics”, Vol. 30, pp. 555–578. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp044
Nuance®. (2014), Dragon naturally speaking premium. Speech recognition software.
Malvern D. et al. (2004), Lexical diversity and language development: Quantification and assessment. London: MacMillan. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230511804
Pallotti G. (2022), Cratylus’ silence: On the philosophy and methodology of complex dynamic systems theory in SLA. „Second Language Research”, Vol. 38, pp. 689–701. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658321992451
Rokoszewska K. (2022), The dynamics of monthly growth rates in the emergence of complexity, accuracy, and fluency in L2 English writing at secondary school–a learner corpus analysis. „System”, Vol. 106, 102775. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2022.102775
Rokoszewska K. (2024), The relationships between the average semester growth rates of complexity, accuracy, and fluency in L2 English writing. [in press]
Spoelman M., Verspoor M. (2010), Dynamic patterns in the development of accuracy and complexity: A longitudinal case study on the acquisition of Finnish. „Applied Linguistics”, Vol. 31, pp. 532–553. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amq001
Storch N., Tapper J. (2009), The impact of an EAP course on postgraduate writing. „Journal of English for Academic Purposes”, Vol. 8, pp. 207–223. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2009.03.001
van Geert P., Dijk M. (2002), Focus on variability: New tools to study intra-individual variability in developmental data. „Infant Behaviour and Development”, Vol. 25, pp. 340–375. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0163-6383(02)00140-6
van Geert P., Verspoor M. (2015), Dynamic systems and language development, (in:) MacWhinney B., O’Grady W. (eds.), The handbook of language emergence. New York: Wiley and Sons, pp. 537–556. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118346136.ch24
Verspoor M., Lowie W., van Dijk M. (2008), Variability in second language development from a dynamic systems perspective. „Modern Language Journal”, Vol. 92, pp. 214–231. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2008.00715.x
Verspoor M., de Bot K., Lowie W. (2011), A dynamic approach to second language development. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.29
Verspoor M., Schmid M.S., Xu X. (2012), A dynamic usage based perspective on L2 writing. „Journal of Second Language Writing”, Vol. 21, pp. 239–263. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2012.03.007
Verspoor M., Lowie W., Wieling M. (2020), L2 developmental measures from a dynamic perspective, (in:) Le Bruyn B., Paquot M. (eds.), Learner corpus research meets second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.172–190. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108674577.009
Vyatkina N., Hirschmann H., Golcher F. (2015), Syntactic modification at early stages of L2 German writing development: A longitudinal learner corpus study. „Journal of Second Language Writing”, Vol. 29, pp. 28–50. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2015.06.006
Zheng Y. (2016), The complex, dynamic development of L2 lexical use: A longitudinal study on Chinese learners of English. „System”, Vol. 56, pp. 40–53. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2015.11.007
Licence
© Katarzyna Rokoszewska 2024
Ce travail est disponible sous licence Creative Commons Attribution - Pas de Modification 4.0 International.
Auteurs :
Les auteurs de textes acceptés pour publication dans la revue Neofilolog sont tenus de remplir, signer et renvoyer à l'adresse de la rédaction, un accord sur l'octroi d'une licence gratuite pour les œuvres, avec obligation d'accorder une sous-licence CC.
En vertu de cet accord, les auteurs des textes publiés dans la revue Neofilolog accordent à l'Université Adam Mickiewicz de Poznań une licence non exclusive et gratuite et permettent l'utilisation de la sous-licence Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-ND 4.0).
Les auteurs se réservent le droit de disposer librement de l'œuvre.
Utilisateurs :
Les utilisateurs d'Internet intéressés ont le droit d'utiliser les œuvres publiées à partir de l'année 2017 sous réserve des conditions suivantes :
- reconnaissance de la qualité d'auteur - l'obligation de fournir des informations sur la qualité d'auteur, le titre, la source (liens vers l'œuvre originale, DOI) et la licence, ainsi que l'œuvre distribuée ;
- sans créer d'œuvres dérivées - l'œuvre doit être conservée dans sa forme originale, p. ex. les traductions ou les interprétations ne peuvent être distribuées sans le consentement de l'auteur.
Tous les textes publiés sont soumis au droit d'auteur.
Autres :
L'Université Adam Mickiewicz de Poznań se réserve le droit à la revue dans son ensemble (mise en page, forme graphique, titre, conception de la couverture, logo, etc.).
.