阐明语境多样性对第二语言写作水平的影响:基于语料库的语言复杂性测量分析

IF 0.8 Q3 LINGUISTICS
Masoomeh Estaji, Arya Ghoddousi
{"title":"阐明语境多样性对第二语言写作水平的影响:基于语料库的语言复杂性测量分析","authors":"Masoomeh Estaji, Arya Ghoddousi","doi":"10.1515/eujal-2022-0004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The present study attempted to investigate the writing proficiency differences between the two groups of EFL and ESL writers considering the lexical, syntactic, and morphological complexity measures. Additionally, it aimed to disclose the association between writing proficiency and the utilization of the New General Service List (NGSL). To these ends, a corpus of 1331 argumentative essays accumulated from EFL and ESL writers on a single topic was examined. The findings of the analysis in the measures of linguistic complexity showed that the writings of the ESL group scored slightly higher than those of the EFL group in every corresponding sub-construct; that is, ESL writers were found moderately more proficient than EFL writers concerning the lexical, syntactic, and morphological complexity of their writings. However, the outcomes showed that EFL writers utilized more NGSL words in their essays, leading to the consideration that NGSL use may be negatively associated with proficiency levels. Hence, contextual diversity leads to distinct levels of proficiency, and lexical coverage can be considered a great indicator of writing skill and quality.","PeriodicalId":43181,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Applied Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Illuminating the Impacts of Contextual Diversity on L2 Writing Proficiency: A Corpus-Based Analysis in the Measures of Linguistic Complexity\",\"authors\":\"Masoomeh Estaji, Arya Ghoddousi\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/eujal-2022-0004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n The present study attempted to investigate the writing proficiency differences between the two groups of EFL and ESL writers considering the lexical, syntactic, and morphological complexity measures. Additionally, it aimed to disclose the association between writing proficiency and the utilization of the New General Service List (NGSL). To these ends, a corpus of 1331 argumentative essays accumulated from EFL and ESL writers on a single topic was examined. The findings of the analysis in the measures of linguistic complexity showed that the writings of the ESL group scored slightly higher than those of the EFL group in every corresponding sub-construct; that is, ESL writers were found moderately more proficient than EFL writers concerning the lexical, syntactic, and morphological complexity of their writings. However, the outcomes showed that EFL writers utilized more NGSL words in their essays, leading to the consideration that NGSL use may be negatively associated with proficiency levels. Hence, contextual diversity leads to distinct levels of proficiency, and lexical coverage can be considered a great indicator of writing skill and quality.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43181,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Applied Linguistics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Applied Linguistics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/eujal-2022-0004\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Applied Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/eujal-2022-0004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究试图从词法、句法和形态复杂性的角度,调查 EFL 和 ESL 两组写作者之间的写作能力差异。此外,本研究还旨在揭示写作能力与新通用语表(NGSL)使用之间的关联。为此,研究人员对来自 EFL 和 ESL 写作者的 1331 篇单一主题的议论文语料库进行了研究。对语言复杂性的分析结果表明,ESL 组的文章在每个相应的子结构上的得分都略高于 EFL 组;也就是说,ESL 作者在文章的词法、句法和形态复杂性方面的熟练程度适度高于 EFL 作者。然而,研究结果表明,EFL 作家在文章中使用了更多的 NGSL 词,这让人联想到 NGSL 的使用可能与熟练程度呈负相关。因此,语境多样性会导致不同的能力水平,而词汇覆盖面可被视为衡量写作技巧和质量的重要指标。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Illuminating the Impacts of Contextual Diversity on L2 Writing Proficiency: A Corpus-Based Analysis in the Measures of Linguistic Complexity
The present study attempted to investigate the writing proficiency differences between the two groups of EFL and ESL writers considering the lexical, syntactic, and morphological complexity measures. Additionally, it aimed to disclose the association between writing proficiency and the utilization of the New General Service List (NGSL). To these ends, a corpus of 1331 argumentative essays accumulated from EFL and ESL writers on a single topic was examined. The findings of the analysis in the measures of linguistic complexity showed that the writings of the ESL group scored slightly higher than those of the EFL group in every corresponding sub-construct; that is, ESL writers were found moderately more proficient than EFL writers concerning the lexical, syntactic, and morphological complexity of their writings. However, the outcomes showed that EFL writers utilized more NGSL words in their essays, leading to the consideration that NGSL use may be negatively associated with proficiency levels. Hence, contextual diversity leads to distinct levels of proficiency, and lexical coverage can be considered a great indicator of writing skill and quality.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
24
×
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