Syntactic complexity

Robinson’s Cognition Hypothesis and Skehan’s Limited Attentional Capacity Model provide the major impetus for this study. The present article reports the findings of a between-subject factorial experimental research study which explored 1) the effects of increased cognitive task complexity, manipulated through the intentional reasoning demands and number of elements on the lexical and syntactic complexity, accuracy, and fluency (CAF) of EFL writers’ productions; and 2) the joint effects of cognitive task complexity factor and learners’ language learning aptitude (Low vs. High) on the written output. Firstly, we gave Carroll and Sapon’s Modern Language Aptitude Test (MLAT) to 226 participants and then did a random stratification of the low- and high- aptitude learners into three groups. The participants received letter writing tasks with different cognitive complexity levels (low, medium, and high). The findings indicated that increasing cognitive task complexity resulted in significantly higher lexical and syntactic complexity and lower fluency, whereas no significant effect was found on writing accuracy. Moreover, the statistical results revealed no significant interaction effect between task complexity factors and learners’ language aptitude. With regard to the first objective of the study, the findings supported the predictions of Cognition Hypothesis while it is not the case in relation to the second objective of the study.

: This study aims to explore the relationship between syntactic and lexical complexity and also the relationship between different aspects of lexical complexity. To this end, speech monologs of 35 Iranian high-intermediate learners of English on three different tasks (i.e. argumentation, description, and narration) were analyzed for correlations between one measure of syntactic complexity (mean number of clauses per Analysis of Speech Unit) and two measures of lexical complexity (diversity and sophistication). Spearman’s rho was used to calculate correlations between the average scores for syntactic and lexical complexity obtained from the three tasks and also for each of the three tasks individually. The results showed that the average scores for lexical diversity and lexical sophistication correlated positively, but the correlation was found only for the narration task. Also, the average scores for syntactic complexity did not correlate significantly with any of the average scores for the two measures of lexical complexity. However, the pattern of results differed across the three tasks. In the argumentation task, syntactic complexity correlated significantly only with lexical diversity. Syntactic complexity did not correlate significantly with any of the two measures of lexical complexity in the description task. In the case of the narrative task, there was a significant correlation between syntactic complexity and both measures of lexical complexity. The results are discussed in light of Levelt’s (1989) speaking model

The present study investigated the use of lexical bundles (LBs) in research articles authored by English L1 and Persian L1 academic writers, with a special focus on the syntactic roles of LBs in a larger context of sentence level. Four-word bundles were retrieved and classified structurally. The use of identified LBs was compared in two writer groups. The syntactic roles and relative complexity of the bundles’ structures were analyzed in relation to Biber, Gray, and Poonpon’s (2011) hypothesized stages of writing development. The results indicated different patterns of reliance on LBs, with Persian writers making greater use of LBs at higher frequency. In addition, Persian academic writers tended to use high frequency bundles differently from native-speaker academic writers. The results of the syntactic analysis of LBs reflected more frequent use of LBs functioning as compressing lexico-grammatical structures in a native English-speaker corpus, which is indicative of a more complex academic register compared to that of a Persian L1 corpus. The pedagogical implications of the findings for the explicit instruction of syntactically complex corpus-driven LBs for discipline-specific genre writing and suggestions for future research are discussed.

Previous research has shown the differential effects of task-related prompts on syntactic complexity, grammatical accuracy, and lexical diversity when L2 learners use writing prompts to produce a piece of writing. However, the extent to which the freedom in the selection of prompts affects these linguistic facets in L2 argumentative essays is still unknown. The present study, therefore, was designed to investigate differences between syntactic complexity, grammatical accuracy, and lexical diversity in argumentative essays. Seventy-one upper-intermediate male and female Iranian English-as-a-foreign language (EFL) learners from Imam Khomeini International University in Qazvin and Safir Plus institute in Tehran participated in this study. Five-paragraph essays were used to collect data, and SPSS (version 25) was used to analyze the data. Results of multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) showed statistically significant differences between syntactic complexity, grammatical accuracy, and lexical diversity. Results from post-hoc analyses revealed statistically significant differences between lexical diversity and grammatical accuracy as well as lexical diversity and syntactic complexity, but no statistically significant differences were found between grammatical accuracy and syntactic complexity in argumentative essays.

Syntactic complexity has received much attention in English for academic purposes (EAP) research. However, it remains an ignored area of EAP research in the Philippines. This study cross-examined syntactic complexity in research articles (RAs) authored by Filipino researchers (FRs) in Communication, Curriculum and Instruction, and Psychology. Major findings revealed that attributive adjectives, nominal prepositional phrases, and noun premodifiers most dominantly co-occurred across disciplinary RAs. A significant difference exists between the three nominal pre- and postmodifiers and other compressed and implicit and elaborated and explicit syntactic features. As such, Filipino-authored disciplinary RAs are characterized by a compressed and implicit discourse style. Therefore, L2 academic research writing by FRs regardless of the disciplines is syntactically complex with the use of the three compressed and implicit phrasal features. It is likewise filled with very dense packaging of information by the three nominal phrases. The study has practical implications for academic research writing instruction, academic research journals, and professional development training.

To date, with the everyday growth of technology and the increase of online classes, busy modern teachers seek to lighten their burdens and boost their learners’ autonomy. Thus, this multi-method action research aimed to probe the differences between receiving computer-generated and direct corrective feedback (CF) on the syntactic accuracy and complexity of female adolescent Iranian EFL learners’ writing. Two intact classes took part in the study; one group (Group C) received CF from an AWE (Automated Writing Evaluation) tool, called Ginger software, and the other group (Group T) received CF from their teacher. Subject-verb agreement and verb form errors were considered to measure the syntactic accuracy while the average sentence length and verb form variation were regarded as the syntactic complexity. Moreover, via a questionnaire, the students’ perceptions of the kind of CF they had received were taken into account to see which one was more effective. Findings obtained from MANOVA revealed that both groups made significant improvements regarding syntactic accuracy. Group C produced more complex outputs after being exposed to the treatment while Group T didn’t make such progress. The results obtained from the questionnaire also indicated that both groups found the CF satisfactory. However, Group C held more positive attitudes. Not only was the Ginger application effective in decreasing the number of students’ writing errors but also it motivated them to be better writers and write more. The study further points to the likely merits of technology-enhanced feedback in improving EFL learners' writing ability in general, and their written syntactic accuracy/complexity in particular.

lexical diversity of argumentative and narrative writings of L2 learners, and the contribution of syntactic complexity and lexical diversity to the writing quality in the L2 argumentative and narrative writings of EFL learners. To this end, 46 pre-intermediate and intermediate Iranian EFL learners from four intact classes wrote one argumentative and one narrative essay in L2, and one argumentative and one narrative essay in L1 on different topics. Paired-samples t-tests revealed that lexical diversity surfaced more in the L1 writing of the learners. Multiple linear regressions indicated that among five measures of syntactic complexity, mean length of T-unit and clauses per T-unit better predict the quality of argumentative writing. In addition, complex nominals per clause are better predictors of narrative writing quality. Simple linear regressions showed that lexical diversity is a significant predictor of L2 writing in both genres. Based on the findings, writing instructors are advised to provide L2 learners with explicit instruction on the use of diverse vocabulary and different syntactic structures in order to help them improve the quality of their writing.