Dimensions of Text Complexity in the Spoken and Written Modes: A Comparison of Theory-Based Models

Pub Date : 2024-02-21 DOI:10.1177/00754242231222296
Douglas Biber, Tove Larsson, Gregory R. Hancock
{"title":"Dimensions of Text Complexity in the Spoken and Written Modes: A Comparison of Theory-Based Models","authors":"Douglas Biber, Tove Larsson, Gregory R. Hancock","doi":"10.1177/00754242231222296","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In many studies, grammatical complexity has been treated as a single unified construct. However, other research contradicts that view, suggesting instead that the different structural types and syntactic functions of complexity features are distributed in texts in fundamentally different ways. These patterns have been documented in general corpora that include a wide range of spoken and written registers. One question that has not been fully addressed is whether grammatical complexity features are organized in the same ways in the spoken versus written modes. The present study tests the empirical adequacy of four competing models based on different theoretical conceptualizations of text complexity, comparing their goodness-of-fit in spoken versus written modes. The results show that text complexity must be treated as a multi-dimensional construct; dimensions that combine structural type and syntactic function provide the best account of the actual patterns of linguistic co-occurrence. To a large extent, the same complexity dimensions operate in both the spoken and written modes. Two of these dimensions—dependent phrases functioning as noun modifiers and finite dependent clauses functioning as clause-level constituents—represent the strongest co-occurrence patterns. In addition, these two dimensions operate in complementary distribution, in both the spoken and written modes. Overall, though, these two dimensions are shown to represent stronger co-occurrence patterns in the written mode than in the spoken mode.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00754242231222296","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In many studies, grammatical complexity has been treated as a single unified construct. However, other research contradicts that view, suggesting instead that the different structural types and syntactic functions of complexity features are distributed in texts in fundamentally different ways. These patterns have been documented in general corpora that include a wide range of spoken and written registers. One question that has not been fully addressed is whether grammatical complexity features are organized in the same ways in the spoken versus written modes. The present study tests the empirical adequacy of four competing models based on different theoretical conceptualizations of text complexity, comparing their goodness-of-fit in spoken versus written modes. The results show that text complexity must be treated as a multi-dimensional construct; dimensions that combine structural type and syntactic function provide the best account of the actual patterns of linguistic co-occurrence. To a large extent, the same complexity dimensions operate in both the spoken and written modes. Two of these dimensions—dependent phrases functioning as noun modifiers and finite dependent clauses functioning as clause-level constituents—represent the strongest co-occurrence patterns. In addition, these two dimensions operate in complementary distribution, in both the spoken and written modes. Overall, though, these two dimensions are shown to represent stronger co-occurrence patterns in the written mode than in the spoken mode.
分享
查看原文
口语模式和书面模式中的文本复杂性维度:基于理论的模型比较
在许多研究中,语法复杂性被视为单一的统一结构。然而,其他研究却与这一观点相悖,它们认为复杂性特征的不同结构类型和句法功能在文本中的分布有着本质的区别。这些模式已在包括各种口语和书面语语域的通用语料库中得到记录。一个尚未完全解决的问题是,语法复杂性特征在口语和书面语模式中的组织方式是否相同。本研究测试了基于不同文本复杂性理论概念的四种竞争模型的实证适当性,比较了它们在口语和书面语模式中的拟合程度。结果表明,文本复杂性必须被视为一个多维度的结构;结合结构类型和句法功能的维度最能说明语言共现的实际模式。在很大程度上,相同的复杂性维度在口语和书面语中都起作用。其中两个维度--作为名词修饰语的依存短语和作为分句级成分的有限依存从句--代表了最强的共现模式。此外,这两个维度在口语和书面语中的分布也是互补的。但总体而言,这两个维度在书面语模式中的共现模式要强于口语模式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信