Perspectives and challenges for research on syntactic complexity: The case of variation

Transcription

1 Perspectives and challenges for research on syntactic complexity: The case of variation Folkert Kuiken & Ineke Vedder, University of Amsterdam Amsterdam Centre for Language and Communication (ACLC), Colloquium on cross-linguistic aspects of linguistic complexity in second language research, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, December 19, 2014

2 This presentation Syntactic complexity: The case of variation 1. Definition 2. Operationalization and measurement 3. Proficiency levels 4. Language tasks 5. Language modes 6. Genres 7. Languages 8. L2 vs L1 Perspectives of research on complexity 2

3 1. Variation in definition 3

4 Variation in definition of the construct The construct Linguistic complexity cognitive complexity task complexity The definition Broad or narrow definition of linguistic complexity as a multilayered construct 4

5 Challenges Linguistic complexity confounded with related constructs Difficulty, development, proficiency, length (E.g. developmental complexity ; acquisitional complexity ) Construct reductionism : Definition often based on notion of quantity Bulté & Housen, 2012; Han & Lew, 2012; Norris & Ortega, 2009; Ortega, 2012; Pallotti,

6 2. Variation in operationalization and measurement 6

7 Variation in measures used Measures used N&O *) B&H **) Overall complexity 5 18 Complexity by coordination - - Complexity by subordination Phrasal complexity 2 2 Other 3 3 Two or more distinct constructs 6 9 *) Norris & Ortega (2009); n = 16 **) Bulté & Housen (2012); n = 40 7

8 General vs specific measures (1) Overall complexity Mean length of T-unit/AS-unit Complexity by coordination General coordination index Between clauses, within a clause, within a constituent Complexity by subordination Number of clauses per T-unit/100 words Number & type of complement, adverbial and relative clauses 8

9 General vs specific measures (2) Phrasal complexity Number/mean length of clause/phrase Number and mean length of pre- and/or postmodifying noun phrases per 100 words Other Variety, sophistication and acquisitional timing of forms: frequency of modals, passive forms, etc. 9

10 Challenges Redundancy and overlap of measures Norris & Ortega, 2009; Ortega, 2012 Measures questionable or incompatible with definition of construct Pallotti, 2014 Choices of measures often not justified; no accounting of research objectives or type of data Ortega,

11 3. Variation across proficiency levels 11

12 The development of complexity (Norris & Ortega 2009) Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Stage Stage n 12

13 Variation across proficiency levels Co-occurrence of coordination, subordination and phrasal complexity in learner production at any level Coordination, subordination and phrasal complexity thought to be characteristic of particular stages of L2 acquisition Norris & Ortega, 2009 Idiosyncrasy: individual differences between learners; different developmental profiles Vyatkina,

14 Challenges Decrease of complexity is sometimes a sign of higher L2 proficiency Pallotti, 2009; Ortega, 2004, 2012 Difficulty at initial levels of L2 proficiency to distinguish coordinate and subordinate structures Lehmann, 1998; Pallotti, 2014 Use of coordination, subordination or phrasal complexity may depend on genre, mode and stylistic choices rather than L2 proficiency

15 4. Variation across language tasks 15

16 Effects of different task types Instruction task Instructing someone how to perform a particular activity (e.g. map task, class room instruction by teacher) Description task Describing to someone a description a situation in present or past (e.g. picture task) Problem solving task Solving a logical problem or taking a decision (e.g. fire chief task, choice of charity organisation for funding) 16

17 Challenges Different task types for different proficiency levels? Optimal levels of syntactic complexity may vary across tasks (telephone task vs. retelling task) Increase in L2 proficiency both in terms of syntactic growth and use of discourse strategies, according to a particular task Lambert, 2014; Ortega, 2003; Pallotti,

18 5. Variation across language modes 18

19 Grammatical complexity in written & oral mode No effect of mode Granfeldt, 2007; Kormos & Trebits, 2009 Longer clauses, more complex T-units in the written mode Ferrari & Nuzzo, 2009 Fewer dependent clauses in a complex, oral task Kuiken & Vedder,

20 Results of corpus-based research Clausal subordination is more frequent in speech than in writing Biber, Gray & Poonpon, 2011 (Academic) writing is characterized by the use of complex noun phrases Biber, Gray & Poonpon, 2011 Language change over centuries: shift from clausal styles of expression to phrasal styles Biber & Gray,

21 Challenges Measures based on T-units and clausal subordination may be unable to capture important features of L2 writing In L2 writing, measures for assessing phrasal embedding and length of clause may work better Biber & Gray, 2011; Biber, Gray & Poonpon, 2011; Ortega,

22 6. Variation across genres 22

23 Genre effects Complexity may vary considerably in differerent genres E.g. fiction, drama, newspapers, narratives, argumentative esays, monologic or interactive speech Genre effects have been found to be stronger than time effects Yoon & Polio,

24 Challenges Few studies which control for the role of genre Polio & Park, in press Stylistic complexity not taken into account Pallotti,

25 7. Variation across languages 25

26 Correlations between measures of complexity with language proficiency (C-test) Dutch L2 Italian L2 Spanish L2 Overall measures Clauses per T-unit Dep. clauses per clause Coordination Between T-units Within a T-unit Between constituents Subordination Complements Adverbials Relatives X X Postmodifying NP s Number X X Length Kuiken, Vedder & Gilabert,

27 Challenges Variation in the development of complexity across languages Choice of measures not sufficiently related to typological properties of the target (and source) language De Clercq, 2014; Granfeldt & Bernardini, 2014; Gylstadt et al., 2014; Kuiken, Vedder & Gilabert,

28 8. Variation in complexity between L2 and L1 28

29 Comparisons between L2 and L1 Dutch Italian Spanish Overall measures Clauses per T-unit X X Dep. clauses per clause X X Coordination Between T-units X Within a T-unit X X Between constituents X Subordination Complements X X X Adverbials X X Relatives X Postmodifying NP s Number X X Length X Kuiken, Vedder & Gilabert,

30 Challenges Scales used for L2 not always suitable for L1 30

31 Perspectives of research on complexity 31

32 Perspectives (1): Measurement Use of measures related to definition of construct, and to be justified by objectives and type of data Use of both quantitative and qualitative measures Quantitative measures: possibility to use them across languages, but not sufficiently sensitive to L2 development in related areas Qualitative measures (frequency of particular linguistic features): more fine-grained but sometimes very few occurences) 32

33 Perspectives (2): Proficiency levels Interface between development of complexity at advanced levels and use of discourse devices and strategies Investigation of developmental complexity profiles of individual learners Investigation of complexity in combined research design: cross-sectional and longitudinal

34 Perspectives (3): Language tasks Relationship task type optimal level of (type) of complexity Necessity to develop set of standardized tasks across levels ( Frog story for adults?) 34

35 Perspectives (4): Language modes, genres and languages In-depth investigation of influence of mode, genre and topic Investigation of cross-linguistic complexity in different languages