A Corpus-based Comparison of Syntactic Complexity Measures as Indices of Advanced English Text Comprehension in EAP Textbooks and Academic Research Papers

محورهای موضوعی : Research in English Language Pedagogy

Peyman Nasrabady ¹ , Hooshang Khoshsima ² , Amir Mohammadian ³ , Nahid Yarahmadzehi ⁴

1 - Department of English, Chabahar Maritime University, Chabahar, Iran
2 - Department of English, Chabahar Maritime University, Chabahar, Iran
3 - Department of English, Chabahar Maritime University, Chabahar, Iran
4 - Department of English, Chabahar Maritime University, Chabahar, Iran

تاریخ دریافت : 1403/10/11 تاریخ پذیرش : 1403/11/19 تاریخ انتشار : 1404/03/10

کلید واژه: EAP/ESP Textbooks, Corpus, Reading Texts, Research Papers, Syntactic Complexity ,

چکیده مقاله :

This study investigates the syntactic complexity of reading comprehension texts in English for Academic Purposes (EAP) textbooks and academic research papers. By comparing these two text types, the research aims to identify the challenges EAP learners may face in transitioning from simplified instructional materials to complex scholarly texts. A corpus-based approach was employed to analyze the syntactic parameters of 30 EAP textbook passages and 30 research paper discussion sections across three disciplines (Psychology, Accounting, and Pharmacy). The L2SCA tool was used to assess 14 syntactic measures, including sentence length, clause complexity, and lexical density. The findings reveal significant differences in syntactic complexity between EAP textbooks and academic research papers. EAP textbooks generally exhibit simpler syntactic structures, shorter sentences, and a lower structural density compared to scholarly articles. These disparities may hinder EAP learners' ability to comprehend and effectively engage with academic research. The study's results emphasize the need for more discipline-specific EAP materials and tailored language instruction to address the unique syntactic challenges encountered in academic reading. By understanding the syntactic complexities of scholarly texts, educators can better prepare learners for the demands of academic discourse.

 

چکیده انگلیسی:

This study investigates the syntactic complexity of reading comprehension texts in English for Academic Purposes (EAP) textbooks and academic research papers. By comparing these two text types, the research aims to identify the challenges EAP learners may face in transitioning from simplified instructional materials to complex scholarly texts. A corpus-based approach was employed to analyze the syntactic parameters of 30 EAP textbook passages and 30 research paper discussion sections across three disciplines (Psychology, Accounting, and Pharmacy). The L2SCA tool was used to assess 14 syntactic measures, including sentence length, clause complexity, and lexical density. The findings reveal significant differences in syntactic complexity between EAP textbooks and academic research papers. EAP textbooks generally exhibit simpler syntactic structures, shorter sentences, and a lower structural density compared to scholarly articles. These disparities may hinder EAP learners' ability to comprehend and effectively engage with academic research. The study's results emphasize the need for more discipline-specific EAP materials and tailored language instruction to address the unique syntactic challenges encountered in academic reading. By understanding the syntactic complexities of scholarly texts, educators can better prepare learners for the demands of academic discourse.

 

منابع و مأخذ:

Ahmed, Z. A. D. A., & Ahmed, F. E. Y. (2023). Difficulties Encountered by Saudi EFL Learners in English Reading Comprehension. Russian Law Journal, 11(8s). https://doi.org/10.52783/ rlj.v11i8s.1250
Ai, H., & Lu, X. (2013). A corpus-based comparison of syntactic complexity in NNS and NS university students’ writing. Automatic treatment and analysis of learner corpus data, 59. https://doi.org/ 10.1075/scl.59.15ai
Al-Jamal, D. A. H., & Al-Jamal, G. A. (2013). An Investigation of the Difficulties Faced by EFL Undergraduates in Speaking Skills. English Language Teaching, 7, 19-27. https://doi.org/ https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/An-Investigation-of-the-Difficulties-Faced-by-EFL-Al-Jamal-Al-Jamal/5ed3a40b252fc17f5a22b5d56f5065c66794eba2
Alenezi, S. (2016). The suitability of the EFL reading texts at the secondary and preparatory levels as a preparation for academic reading at first year university level in Saudi Arabia University of Essex]. https://drepo.sdl.edu.sa/handle/20.500.14154/45778https://drepo.sdl.edu.sa/handle/20.500.14154/45778
Ali, Z., Palpanadan, S. T., Asad, M. M., Churi, P., & Namaziandost, E. (2022). Reading approaches practiced in EFL classrooms: a narrative review and research agenda. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 7(1), 28. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-022-00155-4
Amnuai, W. (2017). The textual organization of the discussion sections of accounting research articles. The Kasetsart Journal Social Sciences, 40, 389–394-389–394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.kjss.2017.10.007
Amnuai, W. (2019). Analyses of rhetorical moves and linguistic realizations in accounting research article abstracts published in international and Thai-based journals. Sage open, 9(1), 2158244018822384. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244018822384
Arya, D. J., Hiebert, E. H., & Pearson, P. D. (2011). The effects of syntactic and lexical complexity on the comprehension of elementary science texts. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 4(1), 107-125. https://www.iejee.com/index.php/IEJEE/article/view/216
Basturkmen, H. (2009). Commenting on results in published research articles and masters dissertations in language teaching. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 8(4), 241-251. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.jeap.2009.07.001
Beech, J. R. (2009). How to write in psychology: A student guide. Wiley-Blackwell Publishing. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2007-09159-000
Bernal, M., & Bernal, P. (2020). Using reading to teach English as a foreign language. Maskana, 11(2), 18-26. https://doi.org/10.18537/mskn.11.02.02
Biber, D. (1993). Representativeness in corpus design. Literary and linguistic computing, 8(4), 243-257. https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/8.4.243
Biber, D., & Gray, B. (2010). Challenging stereotypes about academic writing: Complexity, elaboration, explicitness. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9(1), 2-20. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.jeap.2010.01.001
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. https://doi.org/ 10.5054/tq.2011.244483
Breakwell, G. M., Barnett, J., & Wright, D. B. (2020). Research Methods in Psychology. SAGE Publications Ltd. http://digital.casalini.it/9781529731934
Casal, J. E., & Lee, J. J. (2019). Syntactic complexity and writing quality in assessed first-year L2 writing. Journal of second language writing, 44, 51-62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2019.03.005
Casal, J. E., Lu, X., Qiu, X., Wang, Y., & Zhang, G. (2021). Syntactic complexity across academic research article part-genres [Article]. A cross-disciplinary perspective, 52. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.jeap.2021.100996
Charalambous, A. C., & Ed. (2011). The Role and Use of Course Books in EFL [Report]. https://eric.ed.gov/ ?id=ED524247
Chen, X., & Meurers, D. (2018). Word frequency and readability: Predicting the text‐level readability with a lexical‐level attribute. Journal of Research in Reading, 41(3), 486-510. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.12121
Coxhead, A., Dang, T. N. Y., & Mukai, S. (2017). Single and multi-word unit vocabulary in university tutorials and laboratories: Evidence from corpora and textbooks. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 30, 66-78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2017.11.001
Davidson, R. A. (2005). Analysis of the complexity of writing used in accounting textbooks over the past 100 years. Accounting Education, 14(1), 53-74. https://doi.org/10.1080/09639280410001695241
Deng, Y., Lei, L., & Liu, D. (2020). Calling for More Consistency, Refinement, and Critical Consideration in the Use of Syntactic Complexity Measures for Writing. Applied linguistics, 42. https://doi.org/ 10.1093/applin/amz069
Evans, L. (2018). Language, translation and accounting: towards a critical research agenda. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 31(7), 1844-1873. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-08-2017-3055
Flowerdew, L. (2005). An integration of corpus-based and genre-based approaches to text analysis in EAP/ESP: Countering criticisms against corpus-based methodologies. English for Specific Purposes, 24(3), 321-332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2004.09.002
Frantz, R. S., Starr, L. E., & Bailey, A. L. (2015). Syntactic Complexity as an Aspect of Text Complexity. Educational Researcher, 44(7), 387-393. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x15603980
Gedik, T. A., & Kolsal, Y. S. (2022). A corpus-based analysis of high school English textbooks and English university entrance exams in Turkey. Theory and Practice of Second Language Acquisition, 8(1), 157-176. https://doi.org/10.31261/TAPSLA.9152
Grabe, W. (2008). Reading in a second language: Moving from theory to practice. Cambridge university press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139150484
Grabe, W., & Stoller, F. L. (2019). Teaching and researching reading. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/ 9781315726274
Grabowski, Ł. (2015). Keywords and lexical bundles within English pharmaceutical discourse: A corpus-driven description. English for Specific Purposes, 38, 23-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2014.10.004
Hartley, J. (2008). Academic writing and publishing: A practical handbook. Routledge. https://doi.org/ 10.4324/9780203927984
Harwood, N. (2005). What do we want EAP teaching materials for? Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 4(2), 149-161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2004.07.008
Heidari, F., Jalilifar, A., & Salimi, A. (2020). Developing a Corpus-Based Word List in Pharmacy Research ‎Articles: A Focus on Academic Culture. International Journal of Society, Culture & Language, 8(1), 1-15. https://www.ijscl.com/article_38565_2dd1fbcc6d319f297ef976ed5ca73675.pdf
Hewavitharana, S., & Vogel, S. (2008). Enhancing a statistical machine translation system by using an automatically extracted parallel corpus from comparable sources. Proceedings of the Workshop on Comparable Corpora, LREC’08 https://www.academia.edu/2876175/ Enhancing Statistical Machine Translation_with_Parallel_Data_extracted_from_Comparable_Corporahttps://www.academia.edu/2876175/Enhancing Statistical Machine Translation with Parallel Data extracted from Comparable Corpora
Hussain, S., Liu, L. Y. J., & Miller, A. D. (2020). Accounting as a dichotomised discipline: An analysis of the source materials used in the construction of accounting articles. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 66, 102086. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2019.04.007
Hyland, K. (2006). English for Academic Purposes: An Advanced Resource Book. Routledge. https://doi.org/ 10.4324/9780203006603
Ji, H. (2009). Mining name translations from comparable corpora by creating bilingual information networks. Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Building and Using Comparable Corpora: from Parallel to Non-parallel Corpora (BUCC) https://aclanthology.org/W09-3107/https://aclanthology.org/W09-3107/
Jin, T., Lu, X., & Ni, J. (2020). Syntactic complexity in adapted teaching materials: Differences among grade levels and implications for benchmarking. The Modern Language Journal, 104(1), 192-208. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12622
Jisu, R., & Moongee, J. (2020). An analysis of the text complexity of listening scripts of high school English textbooks using Coh-Metrix . Korea Journal of English Language and Linguistics, 20(1), 363-383. https://doi.org/ 10.15738/kjell.20..202008.363
Jou, Y. (2017). Hidden challenges of tasks in an EAP writing textbook: EAL graduate students' perceptions and textbook authors’ responses. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 30, 13-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2017.10.001
Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1987). The psychology of reading and language comprehension. Allyn & Bacon. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1986-98384-000
Karami, M., & Salahshoor, F. (2013). The relative significance of lexical richness and syntactic complexity as predictors of academic reading performance. International Journal of Research Studies in Language Learning, 3(2), 17-28. https://doi.org/10.5861/ijrse.2013.477
Koda, K. (2005). Insights into second language reading: A cross-linguistic approach. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524841
Lak, M., Soleimani, H., & Parvaneh, F. (2017). The effect of teacher centeredness method vs. learner-centeredness method on reading comprehension among Iranian EFL learners. Advances in English Language Teaching, 5(1), 1-10. http://european-science.com/jaelt/article/view/4886
Le, T. N. P., & Harrington, M. (2015). Phraseology used to comment on results in the Discussion section of applied linguistics quantitative research articles. English for Specific Purposes, 39, 45-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2015.03.003
Loughran, T., & McDonald, B. (2016). Textual analysis in accounting and finance: A survey. Journal of Accounting Research, 54(4), 1187-1230. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-679X.12123
Lu, X. (2010). Automatic analysis of syntactic complexity in second language writing. International journal of corpus linguistics, 15(4), 474-496. https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.15.4.02lu
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. https://doi.org/10.5054/tq.2011.240859
Martinussen, R., & Mackenzie, G. (2015). Reading comprehension in adolescents with ADHD: Exploring the poor comprehender profile and individual differences in vocabulary and executive functions. Research in developmental disabilities, 38, 329-337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2014.12.007
Mazgutova, D., & Kormos, J. (2015). Syntactic and lexical development in an intensive English for Academic Purposes programme. Journal of second language writing, 29, 3-15. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jslw.2015.06.004
McEnery, T., & Brookes, G. (2022). Building a written corpus: what are the basics? In The Routledge handbook of corpus linguistics (pp. 35-47). Routledge. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/ 10.4324/9780367076399-4/building-written-corpus-basics-tony-mcenery-gavin-brookes https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9780367076399-4/building-written-corpus-basics-tony-mcenery-gavin-brookes
McEnery, T., & Wilson, A. (2001). Corpus Linguistics: An Introduction. Edinburgh University Press. https://doi.org/https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.3366/j.ctvxcrjmp
Mousavi, M., Ganji, M., & Kordi Tamandani, K. (2021). Let’s Judge a Book by its Cover: The Case Study of Active Skills for Reading. Journal of Modern Research in English Language Studies, 8(4), 183-206. https://doi.org/10.30479/jmrels.2021.15774.1919
Movsisyan, A. (2021). Lexical and Grammatical Peculiarities of Accounting Texts and Their Translation. Translation Studies: Theory and Practice, 1(1 (1)), 37-45. https://doi.org/10.46991/TSTP/2021.1.1.45
Najjar, R. (2020). EAP Learners’ Perception of Language Needs and its Matches/Mismatches with Textbook Materials. Iranian Journal of Applied Language Studies, 12(2), 161-184. https://doi.org/10.22111/ ijals.2020.5968
Nuttall, C. (1996). Teaching reading skills in a foreign language. ERIC. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED399531
Nuttall, C. (2005). Teaching Reading Skills in a Foreign Language. Macmillan Education. https://books.google.com/books/about/Teaching_Reading_Skills_in_a_Foreign_Lan.html?id=C1szNwAACAAJ
Ortega, L. (2015). Syntactic complexity in L2 writing: Progress and expansion. Journal of second language writing, 29, 82-94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2015.06.008
Perfetti, C. A., Landi, N., & Oakhill, J. (2005). The Acquisition of Reading Comprehension Skill. In The science of reading: A handbook. (pp. 227-247). Blackwell Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1002/ 9780470757642.ch13
Putra, D. A., & Lukmana, I. (2017). Text complexity in senior high school English textbooks: A systemic functional perspective. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 7(2), 436-444. https://doi.org/ 10.17509/ijal.v7i2.8352
Rasekh, A. E., Jafarzadeh, M., & Simin, S. (2011). Changing general to specific: on the outcome of using special English materials in university English courses. English for Specific Purposes World, 10(31), 1-18. http://utr.spb.ru/ESP-World/Articles_31/Eslam_Jafarzadeh_Simin.pdf
Rayner, K., & Pollatsek, A. (1996). Reading unspaced text is not easy: Comments on the implications of Epelboim et al.'s (1994) study for models of eye movement control in reading. Vision research, 36(3), 461-465. https://doi.org/10.1016/0042-6989(95)00132-8
Ruegg, R., Williams, C., & Araki, N. (2018). Developing EAP Materials: Transforming Learning Through In-House Textbooks. In R. Ruegg & C. Williams (Eds.), Teaching English for Academic Purposes (EAP) in Japan: Studies from an English-medium University (pp. 167-182). Springer Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8264-19 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8264-1910.1007/ 978-981-10-8264-1_9
Sabiq, A. H. A., & Muflihah, M. (2021). Content Analysis of an EAP Coursebook in an Islamic University. JETAL: Journal of English Teaching & Applied Linguistic, 3(1), 12-20. https://doi.org/10.36655/ jetal.v3i1.598
SAMT. (2024a). English for the Students of Accounting (I). SAMT. Retrieved 2024, Jan. 24 from https://samt.ac.ir/fa/book/421/%D8%A7%D9%86%DA%AF%D9%84%DB%8C%D8%B3%DB%8C-%D8%A8%D8%B1%D8%A7%DB%8C-%D8%AF%D8%A7%D9%86%D8%B4%D8%AC%D9% 88%DB%8C%D8%A7%D9%86-%D8%B1%D8%B4%D8%AA%D9%87-%D8%AD%D8%B3% D8%A7%D8%A8%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%B1%DB%8C-%DB%B2-
SAMT. (2024b). English for the Students of Pharmacy. SAMT. Retrieved 2024, Jan. 24 from https://samt.ac.ir/fa/book/441/%D8%A7%D9%86%DA%AF%D9%84%DB%8C%D8%B3%DB%8C-%D8%A8%D8%B1%D8%A7%DB%8C-%D8%AF%D8%A7%D9%86%D8%B4%D8%AC%D9% 88%DB%8C%D8%A7%D9%86-%D8%B1%D8%B4%D8%AA%D9%87-%D8%AF%D8%A7% D8%B1%D9%88%D8%B3%D8%A7%D8%B2%DB%8C
SAMT. (2024c). English for the Students of Psychology. SAMT. Retrieved 2024, Jan. 24 from https://samt.ac.ir/fa/book/1581/%D8%A7%D9%86%DA%AF%D9%84%DB%8C%D8%B3%DB%8C-%D8%A8%D8%B1%D8%A7%DB%8C-%D8%AF%D8%A7%D9%86%D8%B4%D8%AC% D9%88%DB%8C%D8%A7%D9%86-%D8%B1%D8%B4%D8%AA%D9%87-%D8%B1%D9% 88%D8%A7%D9%86-%D8%B4%D9%86%D8%A7%D8%B3%DB%8C
Smirnova, E. (2022). Clausal complexity of expert and student writing: a corpus-based analysis of papers in social sciences. Language Learning in Higher Education, 12(2), 453-475. https://doi.org/doi:10.1515/ cercles-2022-2052
Sun, H. (2020). Studies in Applied Linguistics and TESOL, 20(2). https://doi.org/10.7916/salt.v20i2.7098
Tarlani-Aliabadi, H., Tazik, K., & Azizi, Z. (2022). Exploring the role of language knowledge and background knowledge in reading comprehension of specific-purpose tests in higher education. Language Testing in Asia, 12(1), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-022-00198-x
Walková, M. (2020). Transition markers in EAP textbooks. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 46, 100874. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jeap.2020.100874
Wijanti, W. (2017). Syntactic Complexity in the Reading Materials of English for Academic Purposes Levels 1–3. LLT Journal: A Journal on Language and Language Teaching, 20(2), 102-115. https://doi.org/ 10.24071/llt.v20i2.737
Wood, D. C., & Appel, R. (2014). Multiword constructions in first year business and engineering university textbooks and EAP textbooks. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 15, 1-13. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jeap.2014.03.002
Yang, K., & Bae, J. (2022). A Continuity and Difficulty Analysis of the Reading Texts in Korean High School English Textbooks with the 2015 Revised National Curriculum. English Teaching, 11, 43-62. https://doi.org/10.15858/engtea.77.s1.202209.43
Zainal, L. (2015). Move analysis of pharmacy research article discussion sections Universiti Teknologi MARA]. https://ir.uitm.edu.my/id/eprint/15430https://ir.uitm.edu.my/id/eprint/15430