Home Linguistics & Semiotics Genre Effect on L2 Syntactic Complexity and Holistic Rating for Writing Quality of Intermediate EFL Learners
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Genre Effect on L2 Syntactic Complexity and Holistic Rating for Writing Quality of Intermediate EFL Learners

  • Lili zhang

    Lili Zhang is an associate professor at the School of Foreign Languages, Guizhou University, and a Ph.D. candidate at the School of International Studies, Zhejiang University. Her research efforts focus on corpus linguistics, second language learning, and foreign language teaching.

    and Haitao liu

    Haitao Liu is a professor at the School of International Studies, Zhejiang University. His research interests include quantitative linguistics, corpus linguistics, and language policy and planning.

Published/Copyright: December 9, 2021

Abstract

This exploratory study examines whether genre has an impact on syntactic complexity and holistic rating in EFL writing. Over 300 sample texts produced by intermediate learners were collected from a test and some regular after-class assignments for English writing courses. Each participant completed two writing tasks, one argumentative and the other narrative. Results show that genre type has a significant impact on L2 syntactic complexity. Genre effect is found stronger with timed writing tasks. L2 holistic ratings show correlation with syntactic complexity on the different measure(s) depending on genre type and planning conditions. Regression analyses reveal that for timed writing tasks, clausal density (clauses per sentence) is a reliable predictor for holistic assessment on intermediate EFL learners’ writing quality. It is found to account for 6% of the score variance for timed writing and 10% for timed argumentative writing. Genre is evidenced to be related to EFL writing holistic ratings. Closer examination indicates that while syntactic complexity is predictive of holistic writing scores for argumentative writing, it does not correlate with holistic scores for narrative writing. Other linguistic features rather than syntactic complexity may be accountable. Overall, the study lends support to genre effect in the relationship between syntactic complexity and L2 writing quality holistic rating.

About the authors

Lili zhang

Lili Zhang is an associate professor at the School of Foreign Languages, Guizhou University, and a Ph.D. candidate at the School of International Studies, Zhejiang University. Her research efforts focus on corpus linguistics, second language learning, and foreign language teaching.

Haitao liu

Haitao Liu is a professor at the School of International Studies, Zhejiang University. His research interests include quantitative linguistics, corpus linguistics, and language policy and planning.

References

Beers, S. F., & Nagy, W. E. (2009). Syntactic complexity as a predictor of adolescent writing quality: Which measures? Which genre? Read Writing, 22, 185-200.10.1007/s11145-007-9107-5Search in Google Scholar

Biber, D. (2006). University language: A corpus-based study of spoken and written registers. John Benjamins.10.1075/scl.23Search in Google Scholar

Biber, D., Gray, B., & Staples, S. (2016). Predicting patterns of grammatical complexity across language exam task types and proficiency levels. Applied Linguistics, 37(5), 639-66810.4324/9781003087991-19Search in Google Scholar

Bouwer, R., Béguin, A., Sanders, T., & Bergh, H. V. D. (2015). Effect of genre on the generalizability of writing scores. Language Testing, 32(1), 83-100.10.1177/0265532214542994Search in Google Scholar

Bulté, B., & Housen, A. (2014). Conceptualizing and measuring short-term changes in L2 writing complexity. Journal of Second Language Writing, 26, 42-65.10.1016/j.jslw.2014.09.005Search in Google Scholar

Crossley, S. A., & McNamara, D. S. (2012). Predicting second language writing proficiency: The roles of cohesion and linguistic sophistication. Journal of Research in Reading, 35(2), 115-136.10.1111/j.1467-9817.2010.01449.xSearch in Google Scholar

Crossley, S. A., & McNamara, D. S. (2014). Does writing development equal writing quality? A computational investigation of syntactic complexity in L2 learners. Journal of Second Language Writing, 26, 66-79.10.1016/j.jslw.2014.09.006Search in Google Scholar

Cumming, A., Kantor, R., & Powers, D. E. (2002). Decision making while rating ESL/EFL writing tasks: A descriptive framework. The Modern Language Journal, 86(1), 67-96.10.1111/1540-4781.00137Search in Google Scholar

Ellis, R., & Yuan, F. (2004). The effects of planning on fluency, complexity, and accuracy in second language narrative writing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26, 59-84.10.1017/S0272263104261034Search in Google Scholar

Grant, L., & Ginther, A. (2000). Using computer-tagged linguistic features to describe L2 writing differences. Journal of Second Language Writing, 9(2), 123-145.10.1016/S1060-3743(00)00019-9Search in Google Scholar

Guo, L., Crossley, S. A., & McNamara, D. S. (2013). Predicting human judgments of essay quality in both integrated and independent second language writing samples: A comparison study. Assessing Writing, 18, 218-238.10.1016/j.asw.2013.05.002Search in Google Scholar

Hamp-Lyons, L., & Mathias, S. P. (1994). Examining expert judgments of task difficulty on essay tests. Journal of Second Language Writing, 3(1), 49-68.10.1016/1060-3743(94)90005-1Search in Google Scholar

Hawkins, R. (2001). Second language syntax: A generative introduction. Wiley-Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar

Hoetker, J., & Brossell, G. (1989). The effects of systematic variations in essay topics on the writing performance of college freshmen. College Composition & Communication, 40(4), 414-421.10.2307/358240Search in Google Scholar

Jarvis, S. (2002). Short texts, best-fitting curves and new measures of lexical diversity. Language Testing, 19 (1), 57-84.10.1191/0265532202lt220oaSearch in Google Scholar

Jeong, H. (2017). Narrative and expository genre effects on students, raters, and performance criteria. Assessing Writing, 31, 113-125.10.1016/j.asw.2016.08.006Search in Google Scholar

Ji-young, K. (2014). Predicting L2 writing proficiency using linguistic complexity measures: A corpus-based study. English Teaching, 69(4), 27-51.10.15858/engtea.69.4.201412.27Search in Google Scholar

Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2014). Rating written performance: What do raters do and why? Language Testing, 31(3), 329-348.10.1177/0265532214526174Search in Google Scholar

Kyle, K., & Crossley, S. (2017). Assessing syntactic sophistication in L2 writing: A usage-based approach. Language Testing, 34(4), 513-535.10.1177/0265532217712554Search in Google Scholar

Li, H., & He, L. (2015). A comparison of EFL raters’ essay-rating processes across two types of rating scales. Language Assessment Quarterly, 12(2), 178-212.10.1080/15434303.2015.1011738Search in Google Scholar

Lu, X. (2011). A corpus-based evaluation of syntactic complexity measures as indices of college-level ESL writers’ language development. TESOL Quarterly, 45, 36-62.10.5054/tq.2011.240859Search in Google Scholar

Lu, X. (2014). Computational methods for corpus annotation and analysis. Springer.10.1007/978-94-017-8645-4Search in Google Scholar

Lu, X. (2017). Automated measurement of syntactic complexity in corpus-based L2 writing research and implications for writing assessment. Language Testing, 34(4), 493-511.10.1177/0265532217710675Search in Google Scholar

Lu, X., & Ai, H. (2015). Syntactic complexity in college-level English writing: Differences among writers with diverse L2 backgrounds. Journal of Second Writing, 29, 16-27.10.1016/j.jslw.2015.06.003Search in Google Scholar

Martínez, A. C. L. (2018). Analysis of syntactic complexity in secondary education elf writers at different proficiency levels. Assessing Writing, 35, 1-11.10.1016/j.asw.2017.11.002Search in Google Scholar

Norris, J., & Ortega, L. (2009). Towards an organic approach to investigating CAF in instructed SLA: The case of complexity. Applied Linguistics, 30, 555-578.10.1093/applin/amp044Search in Google Scholar

O’Loughlin, K., & Wigglesworth, G. (2007). Investigating task design in academic writing prompts. In L. Taylor, & P. Falvey (Eds.), IELTS collected papers: Research in speaking and writing performance (pp. 379-421). Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Ortega, L. (2003). Syntactic complexity measures and their relationship to L2 proficiency: A research synthesis of college-level L2 writing. Applied Linguistics, 24, 492-518.10.1093/applin/24.4.492Search in Google Scholar

Polio, C., & Yoon, H.-J. (2018). The reliability and validity of automated tools for examining variation in syntactic complexity across genres. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 28(1), 165-188.10.1111/ijal.12200Search in Google Scholar

Qin, W., & Uccelli, P. (2016). Same language, different functions: A cross-genre analysis of Chinese EFL learners’ writing performance. Journal of Second Language Writing, 33, 3-17.10.1016/j.jslw.2016.06.001Search in Google Scholar

Ruiz-Funes, M. (2015). Exploring the potential of second/foreign language writing for language learning: The effects of task factors and learner variables. Journal of Second Writing, 28, 1-19.10.1016/j.jslw.2015.02.001Search in Google Scholar

Song, M. Y. (2007). A correlational study of the holistic measure with the index measure of accuracy and complexity in international English-as-a-second-language (ESL) student writings [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Mississippi.Search in Google Scholar

Stockwell, G., & Harrington, M. (2003). The incidental development of L2 proficiency in NS-NNS email interactions. CALICO Journal, 20, 337-359.10.1558/cj.v20i2.337-359Search in Google Scholar

Taguchi, N., Crawford, W., & Wetzel, D. Z. (2013). What linguistic features are indicative of writing quality? A case of argumentative essays in a college composition program. TESOL Quarterly, 91, 420-430.10.1002/tesq.91Search in Google Scholar

Verspoor, M., & Sauter, K. (2000). English sentence analysis: An introductory course. John Benjamins.10.1075/z.100Search in Google Scholar

Vyatkina, N. (2013). Specific syntactic complexity: Developmental profiling of individuals based on an annotated learner corpus. The Modern Language Journal, 97, 11-30.10.1111/j.1540-4781.2012.01421.xSearch in Google Scholar

Wolfe-Quintero, K., Inagaki, S., & Kim, H.-Y. (1998). Second language development in writing: Measures of fluency, accuracy, and complexity. University of Hawaii Press.Search in Google Scholar

Yang, W., & Kim, Y. J. (2020). The effect of topic familiarity on the complexity, accuracy, and fluency of second language writing. Applied Linguistics Review, 11(1), 79-108.10.1515/applirev-2017-0017Search in Google Scholar

Yang, W., Lu, X., & Weigle, S. (2015). Different topics, different discourse: Relationships among writing topic, measures of syntactic complexity, and judgments of writing quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 28, 53-67.10.1016/j.jslw.2015.02.002Search in Google Scholar

Yoon, H., & Polio, C. (2017). The linguistic development of students of English as a second language in two written genres. TESOL Quarterly, 51(2), 275-301.10.1002/tesq.296Search in Google Scholar

Yu, G. (2007). Lexical diversity in MELAB writing and speaking task performances. Spaan Fellow Working Papers in Second or Foreign Language Assessment, 5, 79-116.Search in Google Scholar

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by Guizhou University(CN) [GDYB2017005], Department of Education of Guizhou Province (CN) [Qian-Jiao-He YJSCXJH(2018)012], and Quantitative Linguistics Research of Language Regularities (KYTD202006).

Published Online: 2021-12-09
Published in Print: 2021-12-20

© 2021 FLTRP, Walter de Gruyter, Cultural and Education Section British Embassy

Downloaded on 16.3.2026 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/CJAL-2021-0029/html
Scroll to top button