Explore the vast range of titles available.

Syntactic complexity is an important measure of second language (L2) writing proficiency (Larsen-Freeman, 1978; Lu, 2011). Large-grained indices such as the mean length of T-unit (MLTU) have been used with the most consistency in L2 writing studies (Ortega, 2003). Recently, indices such as MLTU have been criticized, both for the difficulty in interpretation (e.g., Noms & Ortega, 2009) and for a potentially misplaced focus on clausal subordination (e.g., Biber, Gray, & Poonpon, 2011). In this article, we attempt to address both of these criticisms by using traditional indices of syntactic complexity (e.g., MLTU), finegrained indices of clausal complexity, and fine-grained indices of phrasal complexity to predict holistic scores of writing quality. In 4 studies, we used indices of each index type to predict holistic writing quality scores in independent essays on the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL). We then used all index types in a combined analysis to predict a holistic writing score. The results indicated that finegrained indices of phrasal complexity were better predictors of writing quality than either traditional or fine-grained clausal indices, though a single fine-grained index of clausal complexity contributed to the combined model. These results provide some support for Biber et al.'s (2011) claims regarding complexity and academic L2 writing proficiency.

Studies of L2 writing development usually measure T‐units and clausal subordination to assess grammatical complexity, assuming that increased subordination is typical of advanced writing. In this article we challenge this practice by showing that these measures are much more characteristic of conversation than academic writing. The article begins with a critical evaluation of T‐units and clausal subordination as measures of writing development, arguing that they have not proven to be effective discriminators of language proficiency differences. These shortcomings lead to the question of whether these measures actually capture the complexities of professional academic writing, and if not, what alternative measures are better suited? Corpus‐based analyses are undertaken to answer these questions, investigating 28 grammatical features in research articles contrasted with conversation. The results are surprising, showing that most clausal subordination measures are actually more common in conversation than academic writing. In contrast, fundamentally different kinds of grammatical complexity are common in academic writing: complex noun phrase constituents (rather than clause constituents) and complex phrases (rather than clauses). Based on these findings, we hypothesize a sequence of developmental stages for student writing, proposing a radically new approach for the study of complexity in student writing development.

This study explored the effects of increasing the number of elements and the degree of reasoning on second language (L2) writing and also examined the relationship between writing motivational beliefs and anxiety and L2 writing in simple versus complex tasks. Sixty upper-intermediate L2 learners were invited to write simple and complex argumentative essays and to complete a multidimensional writing motivational beliefs questionnaire and a writing anxiety questionnaire. Multiple measures were taken to detect the effects of increasing task complexity on learners’ L2 writing syntactic complexity and accuracy and the relationship between individual learner factors and each of the L2 writing measures in the simple and complex task. Results show that increasing task complexity result in increases in subordination use and simultaneous decreases in learners’ L2 writing accuracy. The role of motivation and anxiety is more evident in the complex task. These results are discussed with reference to the Cognition Hypothesis and the Trade-off Hypothesis, highlighting the necessity of employing multidimensional measures of motivation and anxiety.

Background Widespread Connected Speech (CS) changes (e.g., slower speech rate, more word repetitions, lower lexical diversity, reduced syntactic complexity) have been documented in Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI). Nevertheless, the CS profile of individuals with Subjective Cognitive Decline (SCD; who are often considered to be at an even earlier stage of Alzheimer's disease (AD)), potential relationships between CS features in SCD, and how CS samples produced by individuals with SCD compare to those produced by controls and individuals with MCI remain unclear. The aim of this study was to compare the CS features and relationships between these features in SCD to those of controls and individuals with MCI. Method Thirty CS features, part of all CS domains (e.g., fluency (e.g., filled pauses), lexical (e.g., word frequency), syntactic (e.g., subordinate clauses)) were extracted using Natural Language Processing techniques from the CS samples of 156 controls, 109 individuals with SCD, and 239 individuals with MCI. Groups were compared using ANCOVA models on the extracted CS features. Gaussian Graphical Models were then used to construct a CS network for each group with the CS features. Result The ANCOVA analyses showed an increased speech rate (versus controls and individuals with MCI) and a lower local coherence (versus controls) in SCD. Moreover, our network analysis revealed increased (e.g., proportion of nouns, semantic idea density), decreased (e.g., proportions of pronouns and verbs), or intermediate (e.g., word valence) standardized node strength centralities in the SCD network compared to the Control and MCI networks. Examination of prominent edges in the SCD network revealed a similar pattern, with some increased (e.g., word frequency – noun valence), decreased (e.g., number of words – efficiency), and intermediate weights (e.g., word frequency – noun frequency) compared to the other networks. Conclusion Our results suggest subtle CS changes in SCD, mainly in the lexical and semantic domains. Furthermore, our network analysis demonstrates that SCD represents an intermediate stage between healthy aging and MCI. Finally, we show that network analysis helps gain a different and more in‐depth understanding of CS in the early stages of the AD continuum.

Previous research on the L1 acquisition of motion event expression suggests that mapping multiple semantic components onto syntactic units is associated with greater difficulties in verb-framed than in satellite-framed languages, because the former require more complex structures (using subordination). This study investigated the impact of this language-specific difference in English–French bilingual children’s caused motion expressions. 2L1 children (n = 96) between 4 and 10 years and monolingual English and French children (n = 96) described video animations portraying caused motion events involving multiple semantic components. Results revealed reduced rates of subordinate constructions in bilinguals’ French descriptions, and more so in older than younger children, while English responses aligned with monolinguals. Semantic density of responses strongly predicted syntactic complexity, but exclusively in French. These asymmetric findings indicate a task-specific syntactic relief strategy and are discussed in the context of theoretical claims about universal biases of event encoding and bilingual-specific optimisation strategies.

The goal of this article is to present a detailed overview of the empirical patterns concerning null subjects in Spanish, and the theories that have been proposed to account for them. After revising the syntactic, morphological and pragmatic aspects of the distinction between null and overt subjects in both main and subordinate clauses, the article discusses different approaches to (i) the nature of the null subject, (ii) the nature of the clausal property that makes them possible and (iii) the possible syntactic differences between null subjects and overt preverbal subjects.

Although advice is routinely offered in ordinary conversation, commentators and analysts have treated it as a special or delicate type of action, noticing a number of challenges associated with both providing and receiving it. In this article, I first describe the most basic social-sequential context for giving advice and explicate how the formulations speakers use to offer advice are adapted to the distinct epistemic configurations (and other characteristics) that characterize that context. Drawing on Jefferson and Lee’s (1992) observations regarding ‘troubles tellings’, I argue that speakers typically offer advice when a co-participant reports an insoluble trouble or problem to one who (may or claims to) possess special knowledge about the domain of trouble. I show how this epistemic configuration constitutes a ‘home environment’ for advice-giving (i.e. a place where advice may be relevantly offered) and discuss how speakers vary the design of their advice (e.g. using different grammatical forms) to adapt to the sequential environments that entail different epistemic configurations. Finally, I consider how alternative, contrasting responses to advice manage (e.g. by ratifying or challenging) the epistemic framework set in motion by advice-giving.

Learner corpus studies using syntactic complexity as a construct for characterizing learner proficiency have found that higher proficiency permits learners to produce more complex syntactic structures. However, the majority of previous studies have focused on writing, almost exclusively with adult second language (L2) learners. Given the fundamentally different mechanisms underlying speaking and writing activities, this study investigated (a) how different processes involved in writing and speaking performance affect child L2 learners’ sentence production, and (b) whether syntactic complexity is a better predictor of proficiency in a particular production type. To this end, we analyzed syntactic complexity for written and spoken corpora supplied by native Korean‐speaking child learners of English using 7 syntactic complexity indices. Results showed that learners used longer sentences, more subordination, more verb phrases per T‑unit, and less coordination in writing than in speaking. In addition, a prediction model fitted to the written corpus explained more of the variance in proficiency scores than a model based on the spoken corpus. These findings indicate that the different processes underlying writing and speaking influence the way that beginning‐level child L2 learners produce sentences in writing and speaking tasks.

Cet article s’intéresse à la catégorie syntaxique de la structure en prép. + quoi . Les groupes prép. + quoi étudiés sont ceux représentant des circonstants extra-prédicatifs de phrase, comme après quoi, à cause de quoi, au lieu de quoi , etc. Ils se distinguent des groupes prép. + quoi en tant que compléments essentiels (par exemple à quoi ) et circonstants intra-prédicatifs (par exemple en quoi ) articulés à un verbe. Dans cette étude du statut syntaxique de la structure en prép. + quoi , nous cherchons plus précisément à savoir si prép. + quoi fonctionne comme un subordonnant, comme un coordonnant, comme un adverbe, etc. Notre recherche montre qu’il s’agit d’une structure hybride tenant à la fois de la subordination et de l’autonomie prédicative.

Purpose: This study examined the relationship between utterance length, syntactic complexity, and the probability of making an error at the utterance level. Method: The participants in this study included 830 Spanish-speaking first graders who were learning English at school. Story retells in both Spanish and English were collected from all children. Generalized mixed linear models were used to examine within-child and between-children effects of utterance length and subordination on the probability of making an error at the utterance level. Results: The relationship between utterance length and grammaticality was found to differ by error type (omission vs. commission), language (Spanish vs. English), and level of analysis (within-child vs. between-children). For errors of commission, the probability of making an error increased as a child produced utterances that were longer relative to their average utterance length (within-child effect). Contrastively, for errors of omission, the probability of making an error decreased when a child produced utterances that were longer relative to their average utterance length (within-child effect). In English, a child who produced utterances that were, on average, longer than the average utterance length for all children produced more errors of commission and fewer errors of omission (between-children effect). This between-children effect was similar in Spanish for errors of commission but nonsignificant for errors of omission. For both error types, the within-child effects of utterance length were moderated by the use of subordination. Conclusion: The relationship between utterance length and grammaticality is complex and varies by error type, language, and whether the frame of reference is the child's own language (within-child effect) or the language of other children (between-children effect).