Lexical Richness in Research Articles Written by Iranian and Foreign Writers
محورهای موضوعی : نشریه تخصصی زبان، فرهنگ، و ترجمه (دوفصلنامه)پیمان دباش 1 , سید فواد ابراهیمی 2
1 - گروه زبان انگلیسی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد بوشهر، بوشهر، ایران
2 - گروه زبان انگلیسی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد شادگان، ایران
کلید واژه: Lexical Density, lexical diversity, Lexical richness, Lexical sophistication,
چکیده مقاله :
This study aimed at investigating lexical richness in the articles written by Iranian and foreign scholars. To this end, a quantitative descriptive design was used. As the corpus of this study, 34 English Language Teaching (ELT) papers were randomly selected from different ISI and Academic-Research journals. 17 papers were written by Iranian researchers and 17 by foreign researchers. The journals from which the papers written by foreign writers were selected are EAP Journal and System. The journals from which the papers written by Iranian writers were selected are Journal of Research in Applied Linguistics and Journal of Teaching Language Skills. Analysis of the corpus was done based on the framework proposed by Lei and Yang (2020), wherein lexical richness was measured in three dimensions including lexical diversity, lexical density, and lexical sophistication. To analyze the data, descriptive as well as inferential statistics were used. The findings revealed that the median score of the lexical diversity, lexical density and lexical sophistication of the papers written by the foreign researchers were higher than those of the papers written by the Iranian researchers. To examine whether this difference is significant, Mann-Whitney U test was run and the results confirmed that there is a significant difference between the three dimensions (i.e., lexical diversity, lexical density and lexical sophistication) of the lexical richness of the papers written by Iranian and foreign scholars. The findings of this study could be considered by EFL learners/teachers, curriculum planners and researchers.
This study aimed at investigating lexical richness in the articles written by Iranian and foreign scholars. To this end, a quantitative descriptive design was used. As the corpus of this study, 34 English Language Teaching (ELT) papers were randomly selected from different ISI and Academic-Research journals. 17 papers were written by Iranian researchers and 17 by foreign researchers. The journals from which the papers written by foreign writers were selected are EAP Journal and System. The journals from which the papers written by Iranian writers were selected are Journal of Research in Applied Linguistics and Journal of Teaching Language Skills. Analysis of the corpus was done based on the framework proposed by Lei and Yang (2020), wherein lexical richness was measured in three dimensions including lexical diversity, lexical density, and lexical sophistication. To analyze the data, descriptive as well as inferential statistics were used. The findings revealed that the median score of the lexical diversity, lexical density and lexical sophistication of the papers written by the foreign researchers were higher than those of the papers written by the Iranian researchers. To examine whether this difference is significant, Mann-Whitney U test was run and the results confirmed that there is a significant difference between the three dimensions (i.e., lexical diversity, lexical density and lexical sophistication) of the lexical richness of the papers written by Iranian and foreign scholars. The findings of this study could be considered by EFL learners/teachers, curriculum planners and researchers.
References
Anjomshoa, L., & Zamanian, M. (2014). The effect of vocabulary
knowledge on reading comprehension of Iranian EFL learners in
Kerman Azad University. International Journal on Studies in English
Language and Literature (IJSELL), 2(5), 90-95.
Anthony, L. (2014). AntWordProfiler. Tokyo, Japan: Waseda University.
Version 1.4.0. Retrieved from https:// www.
laurenceanthony.net/software.
Azadnia, M., Lotfi, A.R., & Biria, R. (2019). A study of syntactic
complexity via Coh-Metrix: Similarities and differences of Ph.D.
dissertations written by Iranian University students and English native
speakers. Research in English Language Pedagogy (RELP), 7(2), 232-
254.
Breeze, R. (2008). Researching simplicity and sophistication in student
writing. International Journal of English Studies, 8(1), 51-66.
Daller, M. H., & Xue, H. (2009). Vocabulary knowledge and academic
success: A study of Chinese students in UK higher education. In B.
Richards, D. D. Malvern, P. Meara, J. Milton, & J. Treffers-Daller,
(Eds.), Vocabulary studies in first and second language acquisition
(pp. 179-193). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Djiwandono, P.I. (2016). Lexical richness in academic papers: a
comparison between students’ and lecturers’ essays. Indonesian
Journal of Applied Linguistics, 5(2), 209-216.
Debash, P. & Ebrahimi, F. /Journal of Language, Culture, and Translation 4(1) (2021), 107–117
116
Douglas, R. S. (2012). Non-native English-speaking students at
university: Lexical richness and academic success (Unpublished
dissertation). Universitas Calgary.
Ge, X. (2016). Lexical density calculator. Retrieved from
http://gexiaoshuai.top/.
Ghaddesy, M. (1989). The use of vocabulary and collocations in the
writing of primary school students in Singapore. In Nation, P. & Carter,
R. (eds). Vocabulary acquisition (pp. 106 – 117).
Gungor and Yayli (2016). The interplay between text-based vocabulary
size and reading comprehension of Turkish EFL learners. Educational
Sciences: Theory and Practice, 16(4), 1171-1188.
Grant, L., & Ginther, A. (2000). Using computer-tagged linguistic
features to describe L2 writing differences. Journal of Second
Language Writing, 9(2), 123-145.
Gregori-Signesa, C., & Clavel-Arroitia, B. (2015). Analyzing lexical
density and lexical diversity in university students’ written discourse.
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 198, 546-556.
Ibrahim, E.H.E., & Esa, Z. (2019). A comparison of lexical richness in L2
written productions. Ijet, 14(20), 174-181.
Jarvis, S. (2017). Grounding lexical diversity in human judgments.
Language Testing, 34(4), 537–553.
Kim, J.Y. (2014). Predicting L2 writing proficiency using linguistic
complexity measures: A corpus-based study. English Teaching, 69(4),
27-51.
Laufer, B., & Nation, P. (1995). Vocabulary size and use: Lexical richness
in L2 written production. Applied Linguistics, 16(3), 307-322.
Lei, S., & Yang, R. (2020). Lexical richness in research articles: corpusbased comparative study among advanced Chinese learners of English,
English native beginner students and experts. Journal of English for
Academic Purposes, 47, 1-9.
Lu, X. (2010). Automatic analysis of syntactic complexity in second
language writing. International journal of corpus linguistics, 15(4),
474-496.
Lu, X. (2010). Automatic analysis of syntactic complexity in second
language writing. International journal of corpus linguistics, 15(4),
474-496.
Lu, X., & Ai, H. (2013). A corpus-based comparison of syntactic
complexity in NNS and NS university students’ writing. Studies in
Corpus Linguistics, 59, 249-264.
Debash, P. & Ebrahimi, F. /Journal of Language, Culture, and Translation 4(1) (2021), 107–117
117
Malvern, D., & Richards, B. (2013). Lexical diversity and language
development: Quantification and assessment. Basingstoke, UK:
Palgrave Macmillan.
Mehrpour, S., Razmjoo, S., & Kian, P. (2011). The relationship between
depth and breadth of vocabulary knowledge and reading
comprehension among Iranian EFL learners. Journal of English
Language Teaching and Learning, 22(53), 140-147.
Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Nation, I. S. P., & Webb, S. (2011). Researching and analyzing
vocabulary. Boston, MA: Heinle.
Qi, D. (2014). Syntactic complexity of EFL, ESL and ENL: Evidence of
the international corpus network of Asian learners of English
(Master’s thesis). National University of Singapore, Singapore.
Read, J. (2000). Assessing vocabulary. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Snow, C. (2002). Reading for understanding: Toward an R&D program
in reading comprehension. Santa Monica: The RAND Corporation.
