Cover not available
Article published In:
ITL - International Journal of Applied Linguistics
Vol. 175:2 (2024) ► pp.221–241

‘Easy Language’ for migrants in France

Looking for linguistic criteria

ORCID logo | University of Lille
| Leipzig University
| University of Lille
| AsFoReL & ATILF-Université de Lorraine
| University of Lille
One of the target groups of Easy Language, a comprehensibility enhanced variety of a natural language, are migrants who have difficulties with the standard language of the host country. However, regarding French Easy Language, evidence-based linguistic criteria are lacking. Therefore, the present study aims at elaborating suitable linguistic criteria for French Easy Language intended for low-literate migrants. We asked 87 migrants in France to read four texts, two original and two rewritten according to specific criteria, and to answer several comprehension questions presented in a questionnaire. The score of correctly answered questions is significantly higher in the case of the rewritten texts. The article discusses the implications of this result in the context of Easy Language research and gives an outlook on current research desiderata.
Keywords: Easy Language, migrants, comprehensibility, linguistic criteria, French
Article outline
  • Method
    • Experiment in five steps
    • Rewritten texts: Linguistic criteria and analysis
    • Participants and groups
    • Datasets / participants
    • Data description and analysis
    • Generalized linear mixed models
    • Statistical inference: Estimation and tests
  • Results
  • Discussion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 12 May 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/itl.22002.can
References (49)
References
Ahrens, S. (2020). Easy language and administrative texts: Second language learners as a target group. In S. Hansen-Schirra, & S. Maaß (Eds.), Easy Language research: Text and users Perspectives (pp. 67–98). Frank & Timme.Google Scholar
Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J., & Bates, D. M. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59 (4), 390–412. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bates, D. M., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software 67 (1), 1–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blanche-Benveniste, C. (2010). Le français. Usages de la langue parlée. Peeters.Google Scholar
Borghardt, L., Deilen, S., Fuchs, J., Gros, A.-N., Hansen-Schirra, S., Nagels, A., Schiffl, L., & Sommer, J. (2021). Neuroscientific research on the Processing of Easy Language, Frontiers in Communication 6, Article 698044. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brouwers, L., Bernhard, D., Ligozat, A.-L., & François, T. (2012). Simplification syntaxique de phrases pour le français. In A. Braffort, L. Boutora, & G. Sérasset (Eds.), Actes de la Conférence conjointe JEP-TALN-RECITAL (pp. 211–224).Google Scholar
(2014). Syntactic sentence Simplification for French. In S. Williams, A. Diddharthan, & A. Nenkova (Eds.), Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Predicting and Improving Text Readability for Target Reader Populations (pp. 47–56). Association for Computational Linguistics. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bott, S., Rello, L., Drndarevic, B., & Saggion, H. (2012). Can Spanish be simpler? LexSiS: Lexical simplification for Spanish. In Proceedings of COLING 2012 (pp. 357–374).Google Scholar
Canut, E., Delahaie, J., & Husianycia, M. (2020). Vous avez dit FALC ? Pour une adaptation linguistique des textes destinés aux migrants nouvellement arrivés. Langage et Société 171 (3), 171–201. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davison, A., & Kantor, R. N. (1982). On the failure of readability formulas to define readable texts: A case study from adaptations. Reading Research Quarterly 17 (2), 187–209. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Debaisieux, J. M. (2013). Analyses linguistiques sur corpus. Subordination et insubordination en français. Hermes Éditions/Lavoisier.Google Scholar
DG for Migration and Home Affairs (2022). migrant. [URL]
Ebling, S., Battisti, A., Kostrzewa, M., Pfütze, D., Rios, A., Säuberli, A. & Spring, N. (2022). Automatic text simplification for German. Frontiers in Communication 71, Article 706718. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eshkol-Taravella, I., & Grabar, N. (2018). La reformulation comme un moyen de clarification des noms abstraits. In G. Kleiber, E. Hilgert, S. Palma, S. P. Frath, & R. Daval (Eds.), Les catégories abstraites et la référence (pp. 261–280). Reims: Épure.Google Scholar
Fajardo, I., Avila, V., Ferrer, A., Tavares, G., Gomez, M., & Hernandez, A. (2014). Easy-to-read texts for students with intellectual disability: Linguistic factors affecting comprehension. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities 27 (3), 212–225. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
François, T., Gala, N., Watrin, P., & Fairon, C. (2014). FLELex: A graded lexical resource for French foreign learners. Communication at International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation. Reykjavik, Mai 2014.Google Scholar
Freyhoff, G., Hess, G., Kerr, L., Menzel, E., Tronbacke, B., & Van der Veken, K. (1998). Make it simple. European guidelines for the production of easy-to-read information for people with learning disability. ILSMH European Association.Google Scholar
Fuchs, J., Canut, E., Delahaie, J., Husianycia, M. (2021, August 30–31). Easy language research beyond national boundaries. Comparing German “Leichte Sprache” and French “FALC” [Conference presentation]. KLAARA 2021 – 2nd Conference on Easy-to-Read Language Research, Olten, Switzerland.
Gala, N., Javourey-Drevet, L., François, T., & Ziegler, J. C. (2018). La simplification de textes, une aide à l’apprentissage de la lecture. Langue française 199 (3), 123–131. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grabar, N., Farce, E., & Sparrow, L. (2018). Study of readability of health documents with eye tracking approaches. In A. Jönsson, E. Rennes, H. Saggion, S. Stajner, & V. Yaneva (Eds.), Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Automatic Text Adaptation (ATA) (pp. 10–20). Association for Computational Linguistics. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hansen-Schirra, S., & Maaß, C. (2020). Easy Language research: Text and users perspectives. Frank & Timme. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hassemer, J., & Winter, B. (2016). Producing and perceiving gestures conveying height or shape. Gesture 15 (3), 404–424. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Karreman, J., Van der Geest, T., & Buursink, E. (2007). Accessible website content guidelines for users with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities 201, 510–518. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lindholm, C. & Vanhatalo, U. (2021). Introduction. In C. Linholm, & U. Vanhatalo (Eds.), Handbook of Easy Languages in Europe (pp. 11–25). Frank & Timme. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lochmann, A., Hillel, R., & Biagio, S. (2019). The effect of language training on immigrants’ economic integration: Empirical evidence from France. European Economic Review 113 1, 265–296. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lombardi, G. (2020). Capire I documenti en L2: dall’analisi della comprensibilità di un corpus di testi istituzionali per stranieri alla sperimentazione di approcci didttici e linguistici [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Università degli Studi di Genova.
Maaß, C. (2020). Easy Language, plain language, Easy Language plus. Balancing comprehensibility and acceptability. Frank & Timme. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Medero, J., & Ostendorf, M. (2011). Identifying targets for syntactic simplification. In International Workshop on Speech and Language Technology in Education (SLaTE 2011) (pp. 69–72).Google Scholar
Nietzio, A., Scheer, B., & Bühler, C. (2012). How long is a short sentence? – A linguistic approach to definition and validation of rules for easy-to-read material. In K. Miesenberger, A. Karshmer, P. Penaz, & W. Zagler (Eds.), Computers helping people with special needs (pp. 369–376). Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Palmero Aprosio, A., Tonelli, S., Turchi, M., Negri, M., & Di Gangi, M. (2019). Neural text simplification in low-resource conditions using weak supervision. Proceedings of the Workshop on Methods for Optimizing and Evaluating Neural Language Generation (NeuralGen) (pp. 37–40). Association for Computational Linguistics. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Paetzold, G. H. (2016). Lexical simplification for non-native english speakers [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Sheffield.
(2015). Reliable lexical simplification for non-native speakers. In R. Mihalcea, J. Y. Chai, & A. Sarkar (Eds.), Proceedings of NAACL-HLT, 9–16. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pecout, A., Tran, T.-M., & Grabar, N. (2019). Améliorer la diffusion de l’information sur la maladie d’Alzheimer: étude pilote sur la simplification des textes médicaux. Études de linguistique appliquée 195 1, 325–341.Google Scholar
Petersen, S. E., & Ostendorf, M. (2007). Text simplification for language learners: A corpus analysis. Proceedings of the SLaTE Workshop on Speech and Language Technology in Education (pp. 69–72).Google Scholar
Rollin, E. Langlois, Q. Watrin, P. & François, T. (2021). FrenLyS: a tool for the automatic simplification of French general language texts. In Proceedings of Proceedings of Recent Advances in Natural Language Processing (RANLP) 2021, 1196–1205. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
R Core Team (2021). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL [URL]
Schillinger, D. (2001). Improving the quality of chronic disease management for populations with low functional health literacy: A call to action. Disease Management 4 (3), 103–108. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Seretan, V. (2012). Acquisition of syntactic simplification rules for French. In N. Calzolari, K. Choukry, T. Declerck, M. Ugur Dogan, B. Maegaard, J. Mariani, J. Odijk & S. Piperidis (Eds.), Proceedings of the EIght International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’12). [URL]
Shardlow, M. (2014). A survey of automated text simplification. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications. Special Issue on Natural Language Processing 2014, 58–70. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Siddharthan, A. (2006). Syntactic simplification and text cohesion. Research on Language and Computation 4 (1), 77–109. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2014). A survey of research on text simplification. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 165 (2), 259–298. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Siyanova-Chanturia, A., Conklin, K., & Schmitt, N. (2011). Adding more fuel to the fire: An eye-tracking study of idiom processing by native and nonnative speakers. Second Language Research 27 1, 251–272. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Siepmann, D., & Bürgel, C. (2019). Les unités phraséologiques fondamentales du français contemporain. In M. Kauffer, & Y. Keromnes (Eds.), Approches théoriques et empiriques en phraséologie (pp. 189–212). Stauffenberg.Google Scholar
Taché, A. (2018). Pour une politique ambitieuse d’intégration des étrangers arrivant en France. Rapport au premier ministre. [URL]
Tronbacke, B. I. (1999). Guidelines for Easy-to-Read Materials. IFLA.Google Scholar
Tweissi, A. I. (1998). The effects of the amount and type of simplification on foreign language reading comprehension. Reading in a Foreign Language 11 (2), 191–204.Google Scholar
Vandeghinste, V., Müller, A., François, T., & De Clercq, O. (2021). Easy Language in Belgium. In C. Linholm, & U. Vanhatalo (Eds.), Handbook of Easy Languages in Europe (pp. 53–90). Frank & Timme.Google Scholar
Weiss, B. (1997). Communicating with patients who cannot read. The New England Journal of Medicine 337 (4), 272–273. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yano, Y., Long, M. H., & Ross, S. (1994). The effects of simplified and elaborated texts on foreign language reading comprehension. Language Learning 44 (2), 189–219. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Fuchs, Julia
2024. Pragmatics and cognition in Easy Language. Pragmatics & Cognition 31:1 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 18 october 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.