The Korean Association for the Study of English Language and Linguistics

Current Issue

Korean Journal of English Language and Linguistics - Vol. 21

[ Article ]
Korea Journal of English Language and Linguistics - Vol. 21, No. 0, pp.341-358
Abbreviation: KASELL
ISSN: 1598-1398 (Print) 2586-7474 (Online)
Received 13 Mar 2021 Revised 10 Apr 2021 Accepted 20 Apr 2021
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15738/kjell.21..202104.341

Measuring NP Complexity in Korean EFL Writing across CEFR Levels A2, B1 and B2
Jungyeon Kim
Postdoctoral Researcher, Yonsei University, Tel: 02-2123-2329 (jungyeonkim@yonsei.ac.kr)


© 2021 KASELL All rights reserved
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons License, which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

The study reported in this article investigates noun phrase syntactic complexity in the writing of Korean EFL university learners across four kinds of CEFR proficiency levels (Common European Framework of Reference A2, B1_1, B1_2 and B2+) in the International Corpus Network of Asian Learners of English (ICNALE). The method employed to analyze all NPs in the current learner corpus is the measurement of NP complexity using the Tool for the Automatic Analysis of Syntactic Sophistication and Complexity (TAASSC). In order to see if NP complexity differs across the levels of proficiency in Korean EFL writing, this study analyzed fine-grained indices of four different components related to compound NPs, i.e., NP elaboration, nouns as modifiers and modifier variation, determiners, and possessives. The statistical results suggest that the variables of NP elaboration (e.g., prepositions per clause and adjectival modifiers per direct object) are stronger predictors of EFL writing proficiency than the other indices of NP complexity. The current findings broaden earlier corpus-based outcomes with respect to the measurement of EFL writing quality, NP complexity in particular. This study will hopefully lead to the expansion of new studies that can possibly explore the role of NP complexity and/or NP sophistication in accounting for foreign language writing proficiency.


Keywords: TAASSC, NP complexity, ICNALE, Korean EFL writing

References
1. Akaike, H. 1974. A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control 19, 716-723.
2. Alexopoulou, T., M. Michel, A. Murakami and D. Meurers. 2017. Task effects on linguistic complexity and accuracy: A large-scale learner corpus analysis employing natural language processing techniques. Language Learning 67(S1), 180-208.
3. Biber, D., S. Johansson, G. Leech, S. Conrad and E. Finegan. 1999. Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Pearson Education.
4. Biber, D., B. Gray and K. Poonpon. 2011. Should we use characteristics of conversation to measure grammatical complexity in L2 writing development? TESOL Quarterly 45, 5-35.
5. Cohen, J. 1988. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
6. Ellis, R. 2003. Task-based Language Learning and Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
7. Ellis, N. C., U. Römer and M. B. O’Donnell. 2016. Usage-based Approaches to Language Acquisition and Processing: Cognitive and Corpus Investigations of Construction Grammar. Malden, MA: Wiley.
8. Foster, P. and P. Tavakoli. 2009. Native speakers and task performance: Comparing effects on complexity, fluency and lexical diversity. Language Learning 59(4), 977-896.
9. Goss-Sampson, M. A. 2020. Statistical Analysis in JASP 0.14. https://jasp-stats.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Statistical-Analysis-in-JASP-A-Students-Guide-v14-Nov2020.pdf.
10. Housen, A. and F. Kuiken. 2006. Complexity, accuracy and fluency in second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics 30(4), 461-473.
11. Ishikawa, S. 2013. The ICNALE and sophisticated contrastive interlanguage analysis of Asian learners of English. In S. Ishikawa, ed., Learner Corpus Studies in Asia and the World 1, 91-118. Kobe, Japan: Kobe University.
12. JASP Team. 2020. JASP (Version 0.14.1), Computer software.
13. Kobayashi, T. 2008. Usage of countable and uncountable nouns by Japanese learners of English: Two studies using the ICLE error-tagged Japanese sub-corpus. National Institute of Informatics Scholarly and Academic Information Navigator 816(10), 73-82.
14. Kyle, K. 2016. Measuring Syntactic Development in L2 Writing: Fine Grained Indices of Syntactic Complexity and Usage-based Indices of Syntactic Sophistication. Doctoral dissertation, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA.
15. Larsen-Freeman, D. 1983. Assessing global second language proficiency. In H. Seliger and M. Long, eds., Classroom-oriented Research in Second Language Acquisition, 287-304. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
16. Larsen-Freeman, D. 1997. Chaos/Complexity science and second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics 18(2), 141-165.
17. Larsen-Freeman, D. 2006. The emergence of complexity, fluency and accuracy in the oral and written production of five Chinese learners of English. Applied Linguistics 27(4), 590-619.
18. Lu, X. 2010. Automatic analysis of syntactic complexity in second language writing. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 15(4), 474-496.
19. McNamara, D.S., A. C. Graesser, P. M. McCarthy and Z. Cail. 2014. Automated Evaluation of Text and Discourse with Coh-Metrix. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
20. Meara, P. and J. Milton. 2003. X_Lex, the Swansea Levels Test. Newbury, UK: Express Publishing.
21. Milton, J. 2010. The development of vocabulary breadth across the CEFR levels. In I. Bartning, M. Martin and J. Vedder, eds., Second Language Acquisition and Testing in Europe, 211-232. Online: Eurosla.
22. Nation, P. and D. Beglar. 2007. A vocabulary size test. The Language Teacher 31(7), 9-13.
23. Ortega, L. 2003. Syntactic complexity measures and their relationship to L2 proficiency: A research synthesis of college-level L2 writing. Applied Linguistics 4(4), 492-518.
24. Ortega, L. 2009. Understanding Second Language Acquisition. London: Routledge.
25. Osborne, J. 2004. Articles and non-count nouns in learner English: Perception and production. In B. Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk, ed., Practical Applications in Language and Computers (PALC 2003), 359-369. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
26. Papageorgiou, S., J. T. Richard, B. Bridgeman and Y. Cho. 2015. The Association between TOEFL iBT Test Scores and the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) Levels (ETS Research Memorandum RM-15-06). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
27. Shapiro, S. S. and M. B. Wilk. 1965. An analysis of variance test for normality (complete samples). Biometrika 52(3-4), 591-611.
28. Tabachnick, B. G. and L. S. Fidell. 2014. Using Multivariate Statistics. Harlow, UK: Pearson Education.
29. Tomasello, M. 2003. Constructing a Language: A Usage-based Approach to Child Language Acquisition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
30. VanPatten, B. 2002. Processing instruction: An update. Language Learning 52(4), 755-803.
31. Verspoor, M., W. Lowie and M. van Dijk. 2008. Variability in second language development from a dynamic systems perspective. The Modern Language Journal 92(2), 214-231.
32. Vyatkina, N. 2012. The development of second language writing complexity in groups and individuals: A longitudinal learner corpus study. The Modern Language Journal 96(4), 576-598.
33. Vyatkina, N. 2013. Specific syntactic complexity: Developmental profiling of individuals based on an annotated learner corpus. The Modern Language Journal 97(S1), 11-30.