Should we use characteristics of conversation to measure grammatical complexity in L2 writing development

By Douglas Biber, Bethany Gray, Kornwipa Poonpon. 2011

681 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Education, Literature and Literary Theory

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/043e5c1092d791dd383a5ef0fea12951ad0bd291

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Education

In Literature and Literary Theory

Citations in the corpus

Assessing syntactic sophistication in L2 writing: A usage-based approach (2017, background): “Biber et al. (2011), for example, provide corpus-based evidence that suggests phrasal (not clausal) complexity is a feature of academic writing.”
Phrasal complexity in academic writing: A comparison of abstracts written by graduate students and expert writers in applied linguistics (2018, methodology): “Biber et al. (2011) previously noted that finite dependent clauses are acquired at earlier stages of writing development, while nonfinite dependent clauses are often learned at later stages and it is not until advanced levels that we begin to see more frequent use of phrasal modifiers.”
The Routledge Handbook of English for Academic Purposes (2016, background): “Instead, he argues that it also reveals the marketisation and neo-liberalisation of higher education, which is most definitely not a neutral activity (Pennycook, 1997, pp. 258–259).”
Discourse Characteristics of Writing and Speaking Task Types on the "TOEFL iBT"® Test: A Lexico-Grammatical Analysis. "TOEFL iBT"® Research Report. TOEFL iBT-19. Research Report. RR-13-04. (2013, background): “Successful advanced writers of academic research writing make the transition to phrasal styles of discourse, rather than employing the clausal styles typical of speech and written narration (see, e.g., Biber & Gray, 2010; Biber et al., 2011).”
Measuring Syntactic Complexity in L2 Writing Using Fine‐Grained Clausal and Phrasal Indices (2018, methodology): “The widespread use of large-grained syntactic complexity indices has recently been the topic of much interest and criticism in the wider field of applied linguistics (Biber et al., 2011; Bulté & Housen, 2012; Norris & Ortega, 2009).”
What Linguistic Features Are Indicative of Writing Quality? A Case of Argumentative Essays in a College Composition Program (2013, methodology): “This finding is in line with the more recent work of Biber et al. (2011).”
Linguistic features in writing quality and development: An overview (2020, background): “As noted by Biber, Gray, & Poonpon (2011), phrasal complexity is more strongly characteristic of academic writing while clausal complexity is characteristic of speech.”
An update on discourse functions and syntactic complexity in synchronous and asynchronous communication (2016, positive): “The assumptions concerning T-units and clausal subordination were challenged by Biber, Gray, and Poonpon (2011) who conducted corpus-based analyses of 28 grammatical features in academic research articles contrasted with face-to-face conversations.”
Same language, different functions: A cross-genre analysis of Chinese EFL learners’ writing performance (2016, background): “This findingmight echo a critical evaluation on thismeasure done by Biber, Gray, and Poonpon (2011), showing that most clausal subordination measures are actually more effective in discriminating language proficiency in spoken rather than in writing registers.”