Syntactic complexity in Finnish-background EFL learners’ writing at CEFR levels A1–B2

The increasing importance of the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) has led to research on the linguistic characteristics of its levels, as this would help the application of the CEFR in the design of teaching materials, courses, and assessments. This study investigated whether CEFR level...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:European journal of applied linguistics 2022-03, Vol.10 (1), p.142-184
Main Authors: Khushik, Ghulam Abbas, Huhta, Ari
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
allmäneuropeiska referensramen
Automated analysis of learners’ written scripts
Automation
automatisk analys av elevers texter
Clauses
Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR)
Curricula
Educational materials
Educational standards
Engelska som främmande språk
Englanti vieraana kielenä
English as a foreign language (EFL)
English as a second language
Finnish language
Foreign language learning
Infinitives
Language
Linguistics
Noun phrases
oppijoiden kirjoituksen automaattinen analyyysi
Predicate
Rasch model
Second language learning
Second language writing
syktaktinen kompleksisuus
Syntactic complexity
syntaktisk komplexitet
Word meaning
Writing
Yhteinen Eurooppalainen Viitekehys (EVK)
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The increasing importance of the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) has led to research on the linguistic characteristics of its levels, as this would help the application of the CEFR in the design of teaching materials, courses, and assessments. This study investigated whether CEFR levels can be distinguished with reference to syntactic complexity (SC). 14- and 17-year-old Finnish learners of English (N=397) wrote three writing tasks which were rated against the CEFR levels. The ratings were analysed with multi-facet Rasch analysis and the texts were analysed with automated tools. Findings suggest that the clearest separators at lower CEFR levels (A1–A2) were the mean sentence and T-unit length, variation in sentence length, infinitive density, clauses per sentence or T-unit, and verb phrases per T-unit. For higher levels (B1–B2) they were modifiers per noun phrase, mean clause length, complex nominals per clause, and left embeddedness. The results support previous findings that the length of and variation in the longer production units (sentences, T-units) are the SC indices that most clearly separate the lower CEFR levels, whereas the higher levels are best distinguished in terms of complexity at the clausal and phrasal levels.
ISSN:2192-9521
2192-953X
DOI:10.1515/eujal-2021-0011