Conceptualizing and measuring short-term changes in L2 writing complexity

Bulté, Bram; Housen, Alex

doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2014.09.005

Cited by 344 publications

(239 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

212

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The analysis carried out in the DST framework shows the complexity, interconnectivity, and/or independency of the L2 lexical systems. The accumulation of the findings through employing multiple measures demonstrated the significance of neglecting onesize-fits-all measure of L2 complexity as voiced by Bulté and Housen, (2014). Employing triangulated and automated measures to analyse LC can assist researchers and teachers to evaluate LC far more quickly, automatically, and reliably.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Following previous studies (Bulté & Housen, 2014;Lu, 2012;Read, 2000;Storch & Tapper, 2009;Zheng, 2016), LC is indicated as a multidimensional characteristic of language use including three interrelated components: lexical density, diversity, and sophistication. These measures are traditionally subsumed under a comprehensive construct of lexical richness.…”

Section: Dynamic Systems Theorymentioning

confidence: 93%

“…Only in recent years, some scholars have addressed this connection (Bulté & Housen, 2014;Zheng, 2016). Drawing on language complexity and DST insights (Larsen-Freeman & Cameron, 2008;Bulté & Housen, 2014;Verspoor, de Bot, & Lowie, 2011), it is possible to introduce some perspectives into multi-constructed nature and complexity of L2 lexical proficiency. The present study closely expatiated on lexical characteristics of L2 learners' writing change during a longitudinal study, using nine different measures.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Lexical Complexity Development from Dynamic Systems Theory Perspective: Lexical Density, Diversity, and Sophistication

Reza¹,

Gholami²

2017

INT J INSTRUCTION

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Dynamic Systems Theorymentioning

confidence: 93%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Lexical Complexity Development from Dynamic Systems Theory Perspective: Lexical Density, Diversity, and Sophistication

Reza¹,

Gholami²

2017

INT J INSTRUCTION

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…subordination), to language with much higher levels of lexical density and more complex phrases (as opposed to more clauses). Bulté and Housen (2014) found that advanced ESL writers improved over the course of only four months and found the largest effects for mean length of finite clause (our Finite Verb Ratio) suggesting that the finite clause became internally more complex.…”

mentioning

confidence: 84%

“…Following Bulté and Housen (2014), we will define our basic construct as follows: linguistic complexity is a quantitative property of language units. Basically, the greater the number of components a construction has and the more levels of embedding it contains, the more complex it is.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Linguistic complexity in second language development: variability and variation at advanced stages

Verspoor¹,

Lowie²,

Chan³

et al. 2017

rdlc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Longitudinal Development of Grammatical Complexity at the Phrasal and Clausal Levels in Spoken and Written Responses to the TOEFL iBT® Test

Gray

Geluso

Nguyen

2019

ETS Research Report Series

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the present study, we take a longitudinal, corpus‐based perspective to investigate short‐term (over 9 months) linguistic change in the language produced for the spoken and written sections of the TOEFL iBT® test by a group of English‐as‐a‐foreign‐language (EFL) learners in China. The goal of the study is to identify patterns that characterize the trajectory that language learners move through in terms of their use of phrasal and clausal grammatical complexity, as mediated by mode (spoken and written) and task type (independent and integrated). Results of a multidimensional analysis reveal that in many cases, learners developed in expected ways: discourse styles at Time 1 were not always aligned with mode‐ and task type‐specific discourse patterns but developed over time, with discourse styles at Time 2 better approximating expected norms and exhibiting increased task differentiation. These changes were particularly noteworthy for Dimension 1, which is related to phrasal and clausal complexity. Results of a developmental complexity analysis revealed more mixed results, seeming to indicate that the relatively low‐proficiency learners represented by the longitudinal corpus may just be beginning on the hypothesized paths of development. The most important developments occurred for independent writing, in which students exhibited increases in the frequency of phrasal features, as well as functional expansion in the use of a range of complexity features.

show abstract

Conceptualizing and measuring short-term changes in L2 writing complexity

Cited by 344 publications

References 46 publications

Lexical Complexity Development from Dynamic Systems Theory Perspective: Lexical Density, Diversity, and Sophistication

Lexical Complexity Development from Dynamic Systems Theory Perspective: Lexical Density, Diversity, and Sophistication

Linguistic complexity in second language development: variability and variation at advanced stages

The Longitudinal Development of Grammatical Complexity at the Phrasal and Clausal Levels in Spoken and Written Responses to the TOEFL iBT® Test

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About