Syntactic complexity in L2 writing: Individual pathways and emerging group trends

Abstract

The present study aims to contribute to a fuller understanding of how the L2 production of L2 learners varies over time in terms of syntactic complexity by analyzing a substantive number of English L2 writing samples (n = 11) produced by a sizable group of learners (n = 10) over a relatively long period of time (19 months), using a judicious selection of quantitative measures of syntactic complexity. The focus is on synchronic and diachronic variation, both within and across learners. Our analyses show that whereas development over time is relatively regular at the group level, individual developmental paths are characterized by a high degree of variability and often deviate from the mean group trends.

The effects of working memory and declarative memory on instructed second language vocabulary learning: Insights from intelligent CALL

“…An explanation for these results is the notion that the process of learning an L2 is nonlinear and incremental, in which small changes occur over time (Murakami, 2016), thereby coinciding with previous research which has found evidence for nonlinearity in L2 development (e.g., Bulté and Housen, 2018;Murakami, 2016). Another conceivable explanation for the observed nonlinearity may be that, as the experiment progressed, learners might have experienced fatigue, boredom or any other non-developmental individual factors (Bulté and Housen, 2018). It is important to note, however, that the results of the reading questionnaire showed that, on average, learners mostly enjoyed reading the experimental texts.…”

Revisiting genre effects on linguistic features of L2 writing: A usage‐based perspective

“…Syntactic and lexical complexity are two important and major components of complexity, which is the most frequently studied construct of CAF (Bulté & Housen, 2012; Kuiken, Vedder, Housen, & De Clercq, 2019). Numerous studies have shown that syntactic complexity and lexical richness indices can serve as pertinent and valid descriptors of writing and speaking task performance (Kyle & Crossley, 2016; Lu, 2011, 2012) and indicators of language proficiency (Bulté & Housen, 2012, 2018). For this reason, syntactic complexity and lexical richness measures are adopted by this study to describe the linguistic performance in the compositions of learners.…”

How do Polish first-year students write? A corpus study of syntactic complexity in Danish as a foreign language

“…I faglitteraturen er der mange syntaktiske kompleksitetsindekser at vaelge mellem, og forskellene mellem de enkelte indekser har baggrund i, hvilke niveauer af syntaktisk analyse de undersøgte/målte strukturer stammer fra og hvilke aspekter af strukturernes kompleksitet der skal måles. For eksempel anvendte Bulté og Housen [Bulté, Housen, 2018] et saet indekser, der daekker såvel saetnings-og t-enhedsniveau som delsaetnings-(clause-) og fraseniveauet. Lu [Lu, 2010] opdelte derimod sit saet af kompleksitetsindekser i fem grupper efter hvilke egenskaber de er designet til at måle.…”

“…Angående videre forskning synes det hensigtsmaessigt at anvende et større saet kompleksitetsindekser, som vil daekke over flere niveauer af syntaktisk analyse (jf. [Bulté, Housen, 2018]) samt flere diverse aspekter af den syntaktiske kompleksitet (jf. [Lu, 2010]).…”

“…Til trods for det er der mange, som fortsat bruger de mere generelle kompleksitetsindekser med gode resultater (f. eks. [Bulté, Housen, 2018;Kowal, 2016;Lu, 2017;Lahuerta Martínez, 2018]).…”