Constructional complexity as a predictor of Korean EFL learners’ writing proficiency
Based on usage-based constructionist approaches to language development, this study investigates the validity of constructional complexity as a predictor of writing proficiency of Korean EFL learners. We analyzed argumentative essays produced by Korean EFL learners and compared a prediction model that uses English argument structure constructions with a conventional T-unit-based model. We first tested the predictive power of a discriminant function model with argument structure constructions as predictors for assessing writing proficiency of lower- and higher-level learners. We then compared the construction-based model to another model that included T-unit measures as predictors. The results validated the contribution of argument structure constructions for predicting L2 writing proficiency: The construction-based model yielded higher prediction accuracy than the T-unit-based model did, confirming that constructional complexity is closely aligned with writing proficiency. These findings demonstrate the significance of a construction-based model as a reliable tool for diagnosing EFL learners’ writing proficiency.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Syntactic complexity measures in L2 writing
- 3.Constructional approaches to language development
- 4.L2 acquisition of English ASCs
- 5.Present study
- 5.1Research question 1: Constructional model
- 5.1.1Method
- 5.1.1.1Data collection
- 5.1.1.2Variable selection and coding
- 5.1.2Results and discussion
- 5.1.2.1Multivariate analysis of variance
- 5.1.2.2Discriminant function analysis
- 5.2Research question 2: Testing model validity
- 5.2.1Method
- 5.2.2Results and discussion
- 5.2.2.1Multivariate analysis of variance
- 5.2.2.2Discriminant function analysis
- 5.2.2.3Comparison of the models
- 6.General discussion and conclusion
-
References
References (69)
References
Bacha, N. (2001). Writing evaluation: What can analytic versus holistic essay scoring tell us? System,
29
(3), 371–383.
Bardovi-Harlig, K. (1992). A second look at T-unit analysis: Reconsidering the sentence. TESOL Quarterly,
26
(2), 390–395.
Beers, S. F., & Nagy, W. E. (2009). Syntactic complexity as a predictor of adolescent writing quality: Which measures? Which genre? Reading and Writing,
22
(2), 185–200.
Behrens, H. (2009). Usage-based and emergentist approaches to language acquisition. Linguistics,
47
(2), 383–411.
Biber, D., Gray, B., & Poonpon, K. (2011). Should we use characteristics of conversation to measure grammatical complexity in L2 writing development? TESOL Quarterly,
45
(1), 5–35.
Cadierno, T., & Eskildsen, S. W. (Eds.). (2015). Usage-based perspectives on second language learning. De Gruyter.
Chien, B. C., Lin, J. Y., & Yang, W. P. (2006). A classification tree based on discriminant functions. Journal of Information Science and Engineering,
22
(3), 573–594.
Cho, Y. J., & Jeon, M. G. (2015). hankwuke swuyongseng phantanuy silhempangpeplon pikyo yenkwu [A comparative study of acceptability judgment collection methods in Korean]. The Journal of Linguistics Science,
72
1, 397–416.
Conway, A. R., Kane, M. J., Bunting, M. F., Hambrick, D. Z., Wilhelm, O., & Engle, R. W. (2005). Working memory span tasks: A methodological review and user’s guide. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,
12
(5), 769–786.
Croft, W. (2001). Radical construction grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford University Press.
Crossley, S. A., Salsbury, T., & McNamara, D. S. (2012). Predicting the proficiency level of language learners using lexical indices. Language Testing,
29
(2), 243–263.
Ellis, N. C. (2013). Construction grammar and second language acquisition. In T. Hoffmann, & G. Trousdale (Eds.), Oxford handbook of construction grammar (pp. 365–378). Oxford University Press.
Ellis, N. C., & Ferreira-Junior, F. (2009). Construction learning as a function of frequency, frequency distribution, and function. The Modern Language Journal,
93
(3), 370–385.
Ellis, N. C., O’Donnell, M. B., & Römer, U. (2015). Usage-based language learning. In B. MacWhinney, & W. O’Grady (Eds.), The handbook of language emergence (pp. 163–180). John Wiley & Sons.
Ellis, R., & Yuan, F. (2004). The effects of planning on fluency, complexity, and accuracy in second language narrative writing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition,
26
(1), 59–84.
Friginal, E., Li, M., & Weigle, S. C. (2014). Revisiting multiple profiles of learner compositions: A comparison of highly rated NS and NNS essays. Journal of Second Language Writing,
23
1, 1–16.
Goldberg, A. E. (1995). Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. University of Chicago Press.
Goldberg, A. E. (2006). Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford University Press.
Goldberg, A. E. (2013). Constructionist approach. In G. Trousdale, & T. Hoffmann (Eds.), Oxford handbook of construction grammar (pp. 15–31). Oxford University Press.
Goldberg, A. E. (2019). Explain me this: Creativity, competition, and the partial productivity of constructions. Princeton University Press.
Goldberg, A. E., & Casenhiser, D. (2008). Construction learning and second language acquisition. In P. Robinson, & N. C. Ellis (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics and second language acquisition (pp. 197–215). Routledge.
Goldberg, A. E., & Jackendoff, R. (2004). The English resultative as a family of constructions. Language,
80
(3), 532–568.
Gries, S. Th., Hampe, B., & Schönefeld, D. (2005). Converging evidence: Bringing together experimental and corpus data on the association of verbs and constructions. Cognitive Linguistics,
16
(4), 635–676.
Hunt, K. W. (1965). Grammatical structures written at three grade levels (Research Report No. 3). National Council of Teachers of English.
Jackendoff, R. (1997). Twistin’ the night away. Language,
73
(3), 534–559.
Jarvis, S., Grant, L., Bikowski, D., & Ferris, D. (2003). Exploring multiple profiles of highly rated learner compositions. Journal of Second Language Writing,
12
(4), 377–403.
Kim, H., Hwang, H., & Rah, Y. (2017). Young EFL students’ reliance on path-breaking verbs in the use of English argument structure constructions. Journal of Cognitive Science,
18
(3), 341–366.
Kim, H., & Rah, Y. (2016). Effects of verb semantics and proficiency in second language use of constructional knowledge. The Modern Language Journal,
100
(3), 716–731.
Kim, H., Shin, G-H., & Hwang, H. (2020). Integration of verbal and constructional information in the second language processing of English dative constructions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition,
42
(4), 825–847.
Kyle, K. (2016). Measuring syntactic development in L2 writing: Fine grained indices of syntactic complexity and usage-based indices of syntactic sophistication [PhD dissertation]. Georgia State University.
Kyle, K., & Crossley, S. (2017). Assessing syntactic sophistication in L2 writing: A usage-based approach. Language Testing,
34
(4), 513–535.
Lan, G., Liu, Q., & Staples, S. (2019). Grammatical complexity: ‘What does it mean’ and ‘So what’ for L2 writing classrooms? Journal of Second Language Writing,
46
1, 100673.
Langacker, R. W. (2008). Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford University Press.
Lee, J.-H., & Kim, S.-S. (2016). Korean college students’ knowledge on English argument structure constructions depending on English proficiency. Korean Journal of English Language and Linguistics,
16
(2), 121–142.
Lu, X. (2011). A corpus-based evaluation of syntactic complexity measures as indices of college-level ESL writers’ language development. TESOL Quarterly,
45
(1), 36–62.
Lu, X., & Ai, H. (2015). Syntactic complexity in college-level English writing: Differences among writers with diverse L1 backgrounds. Journal of Second Language Writing,
29
1, 16–27.
McClure, K., Pine, J. M., & Lieven, E. V. (2006). Investigating the abstractness of children’s early knowledge of argument structure. Journal of Child Language,
33
(4), 693–720.
Meyers, L., Gamst, S. G., & Guarino, A. J. (2006). Applied multivariate research: Design and interpretation. Sage Publications.
Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2009). Towards an organic approach to investigating CAF in SLA: The case of complexity. Applied Linguistics,
30
(4), 555–578.
O’Brien, R. M. (2007). A caution regarding rules of thumb for variance inflation factors. Quality & Quantity,
41
(5), 673–690.
Oh, S. (2006). Investigating the relationship between fluency measures and second language writing placement test decisions [MA thesis]. University of Hawai‘i.
Ortega, L. (2003). Syntactic complexity measures and their relationship to L2 proficiency: A research synthesis of college-level L2 writing. Applied Linguistics,
24
(4), 492–518.
Ortega, L. (2015). Syntactic complexity in L2 writing: Progress and expansion. Journal of Second Language Writing,
29
1, 82–94.
Pallotti, G. (2015). A simple view of linguistic complexity. Second Language Research,
31
(1), 117–134.
Pinker, S. (1989). Learnability and cognition: The acquisition of argument structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Rah, Y-O. (2014). Effects of construction-grammar-based instruction on the sentence production ability of Korean college learners of English [PhD dissertation]. Seoul National University.
Rappaport Hovav, M., & Levin, B. (1998). Building verb meanings. In W. Geuder (Ed.), The projection of arguments: Lexical and compositional factors (pp. 97–134). CSLI Publications.
Rhee, S.-C., & Jung, C. K. (2012). Yonsei English Learner Corpus (YELC). Proceedings of the first Yonsei English Corpus symposium (pp. 26–36). Seoul.
Rimmer, W. (2006). Measuring grammatical complexity: The Gordian knot. Language Testing,
23
(4), 497–519.
Sethuraman, N. (2002). The acquisition of verbs and argument structure construction [PhD dissertation]. University of California at San Diego.
Sethuraman, N., Goldberg, A. E., & Goodman, J. C. (1997). Using the semantics associated with syntactic frames for interpretation without the aid of non-linguistic context. In Proceedings of the 27th Annual Child Language Research Forum. CSLI Publications.
Shim, J. Y., & Dikken, M. D. (2007). The tense of resultatives: The case of Korean. In K. Moulton, M. Walkow, & E. Elfner (Eds.), NELS 38: Proceedings of the 38th Annual Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society (pp. 337–350). GLSA.
Shin, G.-H. (2020). People also avoid repetition in sentence comprehension: Evidence from multiple postposition constructions in Korean. Linguistics Vanguard,
6
(1), 20190043.
Snyder, W. (2001). On the nature of syntactic variation: Evidence from complex predicates and complex word-formation. Language,
77
1, 324–342.
Sokal, R. R., & Rohlf, F. J. (1995). Biometry. Freeman.
Sung, H. (2019). Korean EFL learners’ processing of English caused-motion construction. English Teaching,
74
(1), 49–73.
Sung, M., & Kim, H. (2022). Effects of verb-construction association on second language constructional generalizations in production and comprehension. Second Language Research,
38
(2), 233–257.
Theakston, A. L., Maslen, R., Lieven, E. V., & Tomasello, M. (2012). The acquisition of the active transitive construction in English: A detailed case study. Cognitive Linguistics,
23
(1), 91–128.
Tomasello, M. (2003). Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Harvard University Press.
Verhelst, N., van Avermaet, P., Takala, S., Figueras, N., & North, B. (2009). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge University Press.
Verspoor, M., Schmid, M. S., & Xu, X. (2012). A dynamic usage-based perspective on L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing,
21
(3), 239–263.
Whong-Ваrr, M. (2005). Morphology, derivational syntax and second language acquisition of resultatives [PhD dissertation]. Durham University.
Wiseman, C. S. (2012). A comparison of the performance of analytic vs. holistic scoring rubrics to assess L2 writing. International Journal of Language Testing,
2
(1), 59–92.
Wolfe-Quintero, K., Inagaki, S., & Kim, H.-Y. (1998). Second language development in writing: Measures of fluency, accuracy, & complexity. University of Hawaii Press.
Wolff, P. (2007). Representing causation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,
136
1, 82–111.