Please wait a minute...
北京第二外国语学院学报  2019, Vol. 41 Issue (2): 81-99    DOI: 10.12002/j.bisu.211
语言学研究     
二语写作句法复杂性研究的新发展
王淼
上海外国语大学新闻传播学院,200083
New Trends of Research on Syntactic Complexity in L2 Writing
Miao WANG
School of Journalism, Shanghai International Studies University,Shanghai 200083, China
 全文: PDF(1947 KB)   HTML
摘要:

二语写作句法复杂性研究是近年来应用语言学和二语习得领域的一个热点话题,国内外学者从不同角度使用不同指标对此进行了大量的实证研究并取得了巨大进展。本文尝试从二语句法复杂性研究内容、研究方法和现存的问题几个角度出发,回顾当前二语写作句法复杂性的研究现状,探讨句法复杂性的研究趋势和二语写作句法复杂性教学的特点,了解二语句法复杂性、多面性、多层次和多维度的本质,希望能为今后的研究设计和统计方法以及二语写作教学提供新的视角和启示。语言复杂性意义维度有助于研究者进一步建立并完善多维度指标,建立语言形式、语言功能和语言意义间的链接,兼顾评估学习者语言水平发展和写作质量的提高。

关键词: 二语习得二语写作句法复杂性写作质量多维度    
Abstract:

The study of syntactic complexity in L2 writing has been one of the hot topics in applied linguistics and second language acquisition in recent years. Both Chinese and overseas scholars have conducted a series of empirical studies employing different measures from different perspectives and great achievements have been obtained. This paper attempts to review the current research situation of syntactic complexity in L2 writing in terms of research content, research methods, research perspectives and existing problems of the study of syntactic complexity in L2 writing. In addition, current trends of research on syntactic complexity and the characteristics of the teaching of syntactic complexity in L2 writing are briefly stated. It is not difficult to see the nature of L2 syntactic complexity is multi-faceted, multi-level and multi-dimensional, and it requires serious attention to research design and the use of appropriate statistical analyses in the future. The multi-faceted, multi-level and multi-dimensional nature of L2 syntactic complexity provides a new perspective and implication for L2 writing pedagogy. The meaning dimension of linguistic complexity might help researchers further establish and develop multi-dimensional measures combining linguistic form, function and meaning, taking the learners’ language development and variation into account, and, at the same time, pay attention to assessing learners’ language proficiency level and writing quality.

Key words: second language acquisition    second language writing    syntactic complexity    writing quality    multi dimensions
收稿日期: 2017-03-08 出版日期: 2019-07-11
PACS:  H315  
基金资助: 本文为上海市高峰学科建设项目、上海外国语大学教育教学改革研究项目“非英语专业学术英语写作分级教学模式探索”阶段性成果
作者简介: 王淼,上海外国语大学新闻传播学院,200083,研究方向:二语习得、语篇分析。电子邮箱:miaowang@shisu.edu.cn
服务  
把本文推荐给朋友
加入引用管理器
E-mail Alert
RSS
作者相关文章  
王淼

引用本文:

王淼. 二语写作句法复杂性研究的新发展[J]. 北京第二外国语学院学报, 2019, 41(2): 81-99.

Miao WANG. New Trends of Research on Syntactic Complexity in L2 Writing. Journal of Beijing International Studies University, 2019, 41(2): 81-99.

链接本文:

https://journal.bisu.edu.cn/CN/10.12002/j.bisu.211        https://journal.bisu.edu.cn/CN/Y2019/V41/I2/81

类别 指标
第一类 单位长度 (1)平均子句长度
(2)平均句子长度
(2)平均T单位长度
第二类 句子复杂度 每个句子中的子句数量
类别 指标
第三类 从属子句使用量 (1)每个T单位中的子句数量
(2)复杂T单位比率(即每个T单位中的复杂T单位数量)
(3)从属子句比率(即每个子句中的从属子句数量)
(4)每个T单位中的从属子句数量
第四类 并列结构使用量 (1)每个子句中的并列短语数量
(2)每个T单位中的并列短语数量
(3)并列句比率(即每个句子中的T单位数量)
第五类 特定短语结构 (1)每个子句中的复杂名词性短语数量
(2)每个T单位中的复杂名词性短语数量
(3)每个T单位中的动词短语数量
表1  二语句法复杂性测量指标(陆小飞、许琪,2016: 413)
图1  多维度句法复杂性框架 注:MLS=句子均长,TU/S=每个句子的T单位数,MLTU=T单位均长,MLC=子句均长,DC/TU=每个T单位包含的从属子句,CP/C=每个子句包含的并列词组,NFE/C=每个子句包含的非限定成分,CNP/C=每个子句包含的复杂名词词组。按照Biber ,Gray & Poonpon(2011)划分,Yang,Lu & Weigle(2015)把复杂名词词组划分为包括一个或者多个形容词前置或者后置的名词词组。
图2  语言分层结构 Ryshina-Pankova (2015:53)
[1] Adams R, Nik Mohd Alwi N A & Newton J . Task complexity effects on the complexity and accuracy of writing via text chat[J]. Journal of Second Language Writing, 2015,29:64~ 81.
doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2015.06.002
[2] Ai H & Lu X . A corpus-based comparison of syntactic complexity in NNS and NS university students writing [C]//Ballier N,Díaz-Negrillo A & Thompson P. Automatic Treatment and Analysis of Learner Corpus Data. Amsterdam:John Benjamins, 2013: 249~ 264.
[3] Biber D, Gray B & Poonpon K . Should we use characteristics of conversation to measure grammatical complexity in L2 writing development?[J]. TESOL Quarterly, 2011,45(1):5~ 35.
doi: 10.5054/tq.2011.244483
[4] Bulté B & Housen A . Conceptualizing and measuring short-term changes in L2 writing complexity[J]. Journal of Second Language Writing, 2014,26 : 42~ 65.
doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2014.09.005
[5] Crossley S A & McNamara D S . Does writing development equal writing quality? A computational investigation of syntactic complexity in L2 learners[J]. Journal of Second Language Writing, 2014,26:66~ 79.
doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2014.09.006
[6] Crossley S A,Roscoe R & McNamara D S . What is successful writing? An investigation into the multiple ways writers can write successful essays[J]. Written Communication, 2014,31(2):184~ 214.
doi: 10.1177/0741088314526354
[7] Crossley S A, Weston J L, McLain Sullivan S T & McNamara D S . The development of writing proficiency as a function of grade level:A linguistic analysis[J]. Written Communication, 2011,28(3):282~ 311.
doi: 10.1177/0741088311410188
[8] Halliday M A K . Spoken and Written Language[M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989.
[9] Halliday M A K . An Introduction to Functional Grammar[M]. London: Arnold, 2004.
[10] Halliday M A K & Matthiessen C M I M . Construing Experience through Meaning:A Language-based Approach to Cognition[M]. London: Continuum, 1999.
[11] Junghare I Y . The Uppsala learner English corpus:A new corpus of Swedish high school students’ writing [C]//Proceedings of the 23rd Scandinavian Conference of Linguistics. Uppsala: Uppsala University, 2009: 181~ 190.
[12] Kuiken F & Vedder I . Syntactic complexity,lexical variation and accuracy as a function of task complexity and proficiency level in L2 writing and speaking [C]//Housen A,Kuiken F & Vedder I. Dimensions of L2 Performance and Proficiency:Complexity,Accuracy and Fluency in SLA. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2012: 143~ 170.
[13] Larsen-Freeman D . Chaos/complexity science and second language acquisition[J]. Applied Linguistics, 1997,18(2):141~ 165.
doi: 10.1093/applin/18.2.141
[14] Larsen-Freeman D . The emergence of complexity, fluency, and accuracy in the oral and written production of five Chinese learners of English [J]. Applied Linguistics, 2006,27(4):590~ 619.
doi: 10.1093/applin/aml029
[15] Larsen-Freeman D . On the complementarity of chaos/complexity theory and dynamic systems theory in understanding the second language acquisition process[J]. Bilingualism:Language and Cognition, 2007,10(1):35~ 37.
[16] Larsen-Freeman D & Cameron L . Research methodology on language development from a complex systems perspective[J]. The Modern Language Journal, 2008,92(2):200~ 213.
doi: 10.1111/modl.2008.92.issue-2
[17] Lu X F . Automatic analysis of syntactic complexity in second language writing[J]. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 2010,15(4):474~ 496.
doi: 10.1075/ijcl.15.4
[18] Lu X F . A corpus-based evaluation of syntactic complexity measures as indices of college-level ESL writers’ language development[J]. TESOL Quarterly, 2011,45(1):36~ 62.
doi: 10.5054/tq.2011.240859
[19] Lu X F . Computational Methods for Corpus Annotation and Analysis[M]. Dordrecht: Springer, 2014.
[20] Lu X F & Ai H Y Syntactic complexity in college-level English writing:Differences among writers with diverse L1 backgrounds[J]. Journal of Second Language Writing, 2015,29:16~ 27.
doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2015.06.003
[21] Mancilla R L, Polat N & Akcay A O . An investigation of native and nonnative English speakers’ levels of written syntactic complexity in asynchronous online discussions[J]. Applied Linguistics, 2017,38(1):112~ 134.
doi: 10.1093/applin/amv012
[22] Mazgutova D & Kormos J . Syntactic and lexical development in an intensive English for academic purposes programme[J]. Journal of Second Language Writing, 2015,29:3~ 15.
doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2015.06.004
[23] Norris J M & Ortega L . Towards an organic approach to investigating CAF in instructed SLA:The case of complexity[J]. Applied Linguistics, 2009,30(4):555~ 578.
doi: 10.1093/applin/amp044
[24] Ortega L . Syntactic complexity measures and their relationship to L2 proficiency:A research synjournal of college-level L2 writing[J]. Applied Linguistics, 2003,24(4):492~ 518.
doi: 10.1093/applin/24.4.492
[25] Ortega L . Interlanguage complexity:A construct in search of theoretical renewal [C]//Szmrecsanyi B & Kortmann B. Linguistic Complexity in Interlanguage Varieties,L2 Varieties,and Contact Languages. Berlin:Walter de Gruyter, 2012: 127~ 155.
[26] Ortega L . Syntactic complexity in L2 writing:Progress and expansion[J]. Journal of Second Language Writing, 2015,29:82~ 94.
doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2015.06.008
[27] Pallotti G . CAF:Defining,refining and differentiating constructs[J]. Applied Linguistics, 2009,30(4):590~ 601.
doi: 10.1093/applin/amp045
[28] Polio C . Research methodology in second language writing research:The case of text-based studies [C]. Silva T & Matsuda P K. On Second Language Writing. Mahwah,New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,Inc., 2001: 91~ 115.
[29] Ryshina-Pankova M . A meaning-based approach to the study of complexity in L2 writing:The case of grammatical metaphor[J]. Journal of Second Language Writing, 2015,29:51~ 63.
doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2015.06.005
[30] Skehan P. A Cognitive Approach to Language Learning[M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998.
[31] Vyatkina N . The development of second language writing complexity in groups and individuals:A longitudinal learner corpus study[J]. The Modern Language Journal, 2012,96(4):576~ 598.
doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4781.2012.01401.x
[32] Vyatkina N . Specific syntactic complexity:Developmental profiling of individuals based on an annotated learner corpus[J]. The Modern Language Journal, 2013,97(S1):11~ 30.
doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4781.2012.01421.x
[33] Vyatkina N, Hirschmann H & Golcher F . Syntactic modification at early stages of L2 German writing development:A longitudinal learner corpus study[J]. Journal of Second Language Writing, 2015,29:28~ 50.
doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2015.06.006
[34] Wolfe-Quintero K, Inagaki S & Kim H Y . Second Language Development in Writing:Measures of Fluency,Accuracy,and Complexity[M]. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press,Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center, 1998.
[35] Yang W W, Lu X F & Weigle S C . Different topics,different discourse:Relation-ships among writing topic,measures of syntactic complexity,and judgments of writing quality[J]. Journal of Second Language Writing, 2015,28:53~ 67.
doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2015.02.002
[36] 鲍贵 . 英语学习者作文句法复杂性变化研究[J]. 外语教学与研究, 2009,41(4):291~ 297.
[37] 鲍贵 . 英语学习者语言复杂性变化对比研究[J]. 现代外语, 2010,33(2):166~ 176.
[38] 杜慧颖, 蔡金亭 . 基于Coh-Metrix的中国英语学习者议论文写作质量预测模型研究[J]. 现代外语, 2013,36(3):293~ 300.
[39] 胡壮麟 . 语法隐喻[J]. 外语教学与研究, 1996,28(4):1~ 7,80.
[40] 黄沭云 . 英语专业学生产出性词汇能力发展评估[J]. 北京第二外国语学院学报, 2012,34(12):75~ 78.
[41] 纪小凌 . 英语学习者书面语发展研究[J]. 现代外语, 2009,32(2):178~ 185,220.
[42] 姜琳, 陈锦 . 读后续写对英语写作语言准确性、复杂性和流利性发展的影响[J]. 现代外语, 2015,38(3):366~ 375.
[43] 陆小飞, 许琪 . 二语句法复杂度分析器及其在二语写作研究中的应用[J]. 外语教学与研究, 2016,48(3):409~ 420.
[44] 邱建华 . 基于网络资源的读写结合教学对英语作文句法复杂性的影响[J]. 现代外语, 2014,37(6):846~ 854.
[45] 万丽芳 . 中国英语专业大学生二语写作中的词汇丰富性研究[J]. 外语界, 2010(1):40~ 46.
[46] 王海华, 李贝贝, 许琳 . 中国英语学习者书面语水平发展个案动态研究[J]. 外语教学与研究, 2015,47(1):67~ 80.
[47] 王海华, 周祥 . 非英语专业大学生写作中词汇丰富性变化的历时研究[J]. 外语与外语教学, 2012(2):40~ 44.
[48] 王静萍 . 资源指引型的任务复杂度对二语写作语言表现的影响[J]. 外语教学, 2013,34(4):65~ 68,104.
[49] 王淼 . 基于动态系统理论的网络英语阅读模式[J]. 外语界, 2011(2):43~ 49,64.
[50] 汪韦珊, 王同顺 . 二语写作句法表现的动态发展[J]. 现代外语, 2015,38(4):503~ 514.
[51] 熊淑慧 . 中美大学生网络远程合作对中国学生英语写作语言特点的影响[J]. 西安外国语大学学报, 2017,25(3):73~ 78.
[52] 徐晓燕, 王维民, 熊燕宇, 蒋婧, 潘小燕, 孙念红 . 中国英语专业学生英语议论文句法复杂性研究[J]. 外语教学与研究, 2013,45(2):264~ 275,320.
[53] 许先文 . 非英语专业研究生二语写作中的词块结构类型研究[J]. 外语界, 2010(5):42~ 47.
[54] 曾祥敏 . 英语专业学生限时作文与平时作文句法复杂性之比较[J]. 解放军外国语学院学报, 2011,34(5):69~ 74.
[55] 张新玲, 周燕 . 任务类型对中国英语学习者写作表现的影响[J]. 现代外语, 2014,37(4):548~ 558.
[56] 张正厚, 吕磊, 乔发光, 李秀芳 . 不同构思时间对非英语专业学生英语写作质量的影响[J]. 外语界, 2010(3):71~ 79.
[57] 郑咏滟, 冯予力 . 学习者句法与词汇复杂性发展的动态系统研究[J]. 现代外语, 2017,40(1):57~ 68.
[58] 朱慧敏, 王俊菊 . 二语写作中个案词汇的使用特征研究——以SO为例[J]. 外语教学理论与实践, 2015(2):60~ 66.
[59] 朱永生, 严世清, 苗兴伟 . 功能语言学导论[M]. 上海: 上海外语教育出版社, 2004.
[1] 张晓东,任娇娇. 二语即时作文高低分组词汇丰富性对比研究[J]. 北京第二外国语学院学报, 2018, 40(4): 41-52.