Exploring syntactic complexity and its relationship with writing quality in EFL argumentative essays

To predict syntactic complexity in second/foreign language writing, some studies have advocated the use of T-unit and clausal subordination measures while others have argued for the use of phrase-based measures. This study seeks to identify syntactic features that can be regarded as discriminators a...
Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Shadloo Farzaneh [verfasserIn] Ahmadi Hesamoddin Shahriari [verfasserIn] Ghonsooly Behzad [verfasserIn]

Format:	E-Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2019

Schlagwörter:	corpus linguistics phrasal features argumentative essays efl learners t-unit

Übergeordnetes Werk:	In: Topics in Linguistics - Sciendo, 2015, 20(2019), 1, Seite 68-81
Übergeordnetes Werk:	volume:20 ; year:2019 ; number:1 ; pages:68-81

Links:	Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Journal toc Journal toc

DOI / URN:	10.2478/topling-2019-0005

Katalog-ID:	DOAJ025550829

Internformat


LEADER	01000caa a22002652 4500
001	DOAJ025550829
003	DE-627
005	20240414123933.0
007	cr uuu---uuuuu
008	230226s2019 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c
024	7		\|a 10.2478/topling-2019-0005 \|2 doi
035			\|a (DE-627)DOAJ025550829
035			\|a (DE-599)DOAJ40dec620a99a41c3a54d1f80924f0f21
040			\|a DE-627 \|b ger \|c DE-627 \|e rakwb
041			\|a eng
050		0	\|a P1-1091
100	0		\|a Shadloo Farzaneh \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
245	1	0	\|a Exploring syntactic complexity and its relationship with writing quality in EFL argumentative essays
264		1	\|c 2019
336			\|a Text \|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|a Computermedien \|b c \|2 rdamedia
338			\|a Online-Ressource \|b cr \|2 rdacarrier
520			\|a To predict syntactic complexity in second/foreign language writing, some studies have advocated the use of T-unit and clausal subordination measures while others have argued for the use of phrase-based measures. This study seeks to identify syntactic features that can be regarded as discriminators among different levels of writing quality. For this purpose, a corpus of argumentative essays by EFL learners was compiled and then the essays were rated and placed into three groups of high-rated, mid-rated, and low-rated essays. The corpus was then coded and analysed for both phrasal and clausal features. The phrasal features were manually coded based on the development scheme hypothesized by Biber, Gray and Poonpon (2011) for academic writing, and the clausal features were analysed using the online L2 Syntactic Complexity Analyzer developed by Lu (2010). A separate ANOVA test was used to compare the three groups of essays for each of the phrasal and clausal features. The findings of the current study demonstrated that subordination and dependent clauses were not good indicators of different writing qualities in our corpus. Also, the pattern of noun phrase complexity predicted by Biber et al. (2011) was not observed across argumentative essays from three different levels of writing quality.
650		4	\|a corpus linguistics
650		4	\|a phrasal features
650		4	\|a argumentative essays
650		4	\|a efl learners
650		4	\|a t-unit
653		0	\|a Philology. Linguistics
700	0		\|a Ahmadi Hesamoddin Shahriari \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Ghonsooly Behzad \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
773	0	8	\|i In \|t Topics in Linguistics \|d Sciendo, 2015 \|g 20(2019), 1, Seite 68-81 \|w (DE-627)862946905 \|w (DE-600)2861555-4 \|x 21996504 \|7 nnns
773	1	8	\|g volume:20 \|g year:2019 \|g number:1 \|g pages:68-81
856	4	0	\|u https://doi.org/10.2478/topling-2019-0005 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u https://doaj.org/article/40dec620a99a41c3a54d1f80924f0f21 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u https://doi.org/10.2478/topling-2019-0005 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	2	\|u https://doaj.org/toc/1337-7590 \|y Journal toc \|z kostenfrei
856	4	2	\|u https://doaj.org/toc/2199-6504 \|y Journal toc \|z kostenfrei
912			\|a GBV_USEFLAG_A
912			\|a SYSFLAG_A
912			\|a GBV_DOAJ
912			\|a GBV_ILN_11
912			\|a GBV_ILN_20
912			\|a GBV_ILN_22
912			\|a GBV_ILN_24
912			\|a GBV_ILN_31
912			\|a GBV_ILN_32
912			\|a GBV_ILN_39
912			\|a GBV_ILN_40
912			\|a GBV_ILN_60
912			\|a GBV_ILN_62
912			\|a GBV_ILN_63
912			\|a GBV_ILN_65
912			\|a GBV_ILN_69
912			\|a GBV_ILN_70
912			\|a GBV_ILN_73
912			\|a GBV_ILN_95
912			\|a GBV_ILN_110
912			\|a GBV_ILN_151
912			\|a GBV_ILN_161
912			\|a GBV_ILN_206
912			\|a GBV_ILN_213
912			\|a GBV_ILN_230
912			\|a GBV_ILN_285
912			\|a GBV_ILN_293
912			\|a GBV_ILN_602
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2006
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2009
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2010
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2014
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2020
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2065
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2093
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4012
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4037
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4112
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4125
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4126
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4249
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4305
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4306
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4322
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4323
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4324
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4325
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4326
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4335
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4367
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4392
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4700
951			\|a AR
952			\|d 20 \|j 2019 \|e 1 \|h 68-81

Indexfelder

author_variant	s f sf a h s ahs g b gb
matchkey_str	article:21996504:2019----::xlrnsnatcopeiyniseainhpihrtnqaiyn
hierarchy_sort_str	2019
callnumber-subject-code	P
publishDate	2019
allfields	10.2478/topling-2019-0005 doi (DE-627)DOAJ025550829 (DE-599)DOAJ40dec620a99a41c3a54d1f80924f0f21 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng P1-1091 Shadloo Farzaneh verfasserin aut Exploring syntactic complexity and its relationship with writing quality in EFL argumentative essays 2019 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier To predict syntactic complexity in second/foreign language writing, some studies have advocated the use of T-unit and clausal subordination measures while others have argued for the use of phrase-based measures. This study seeks to identify syntactic features that can be regarded as discriminators among different levels of writing quality. For this purpose, a corpus of argumentative essays by EFL learners was compiled and then the essays were rated and placed into three groups of high-rated, mid-rated, and low-rated essays. The corpus was then coded and analysed for both phrasal and clausal features. The phrasal features were manually coded based on the development scheme hypothesized by Biber, Gray and Poonpon (2011) for academic writing, and the clausal features were analysed using the online L2 Syntactic Complexity Analyzer developed by Lu (2010). A separate ANOVA test was used to compare the three groups of essays for each of the phrasal and clausal features. The findings of the current study demonstrated that subordination and dependent clauses were not good indicators of different writing qualities in our corpus. Also, the pattern of noun phrase complexity predicted by Biber et al. (2011) was not observed across argumentative essays from three different levels of writing quality. corpus linguistics phrasal features argumentative essays efl learners t-unit Philology. Linguistics Ahmadi Hesamoddin Shahriari verfasserin aut Ghonsooly Behzad verfasserin aut In Topics in Linguistics Sciendo, 2015 20(2019), 1, Seite 68-81 (DE-627)862946905 (DE-600)2861555-4 21996504 nnns volume:20 year:2019 number:1 pages:68-81 https://doi.org/10.2478/topling-2019-0005 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/40dec620a99a41c3a54d1f80924f0f21 kostenfrei https://doi.org/10.2478/topling-2019-0005 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1337-7590 Journal toc kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2199-6504 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4392 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 20 2019 1 68-81
spelling	10.2478/topling-2019-0005 doi (DE-627)DOAJ025550829 (DE-599)DOAJ40dec620a99a41c3a54d1f80924f0f21 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng P1-1091 Shadloo Farzaneh verfasserin aut Exploring syntactic complexity and its relationship with writing quality in EFL argumentative essays 2019 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier To predict syntactic complexity in second/foreign language writing, some studies have advocated the use of T-unit and clausal subordination measures while others have argued for the use of phrase-based measures. This study seeks to identify syntactic features that can be regarded as discriminators among different levels of writing quality. For this purpose, a corpus of argumentative essays by EFL learners was compiled and then the essays were rated and placed into three groups of high-rated, mid-rated, and low-rated essays. The corpus was then coded and analysed for both phrasal and clausal features. The phrasal features were manually coded based on the development scheme hypothesized by Biber, Gray and Poonpon (2011) for academic writing, and the clausal features were analysed using the online L2 Syntactic Complexity Analyzer developed by Lu (2010). A separate ANOVA test was used to compare the three groups of essays for each of the phrasal and clausal features. The findings of the current study demonstrated that subordination and dependent clauses were not good indicators of different writing qualities in our corpus. Also, the pattern of noun phrase complexity predicted by Biber et al. (2011) was not observed across argumentative essays from three different levels of writing quality. corpus linguistics phrasal features argumentative essays efl learners t-unit Philology. Linguistics Ahmadi Hesamoddin Shahriari verfasserin aut Ghonsooly Behzad verfasserin aut In Topics in Linguistics Sciendo, 2015 20(2019), 1, Seite 68-81 (DE-627)862946905 (DE-600)2861555-4 21996504 nnns volume:20 year:2019 number:1 pages:68-81 https://doi.org/10.2478/topling-2019-0005 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/40dec620a99a41c3a54d1f80924f0f21 kostenfrei https://doi.org/10.2478/topling-2019-0005 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1337-7590 Journal toc kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2199-6504 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4392 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 20 2019 1 68-81
allfields_unstemmed	10.2478/topling-2019-0005 doi (DE-627)DOAJ025550829 (DE-599)DOAJ40dec620a99a41c3a54d1f80924f0f21 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng P1-1091 Shadloo Farzaneh verfasserin aut Exploring syntactic complexity and its relationship with writing quality in EFL argumentative essays 2019 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier To predict syntactic complexity in second/foreign language writing, some studies have advocated the use of T-unit and clausal subordination measures while others have argued for the use of phrase-based measures. This study seeks to identify syntactic features that can be regarded as discriminators among different levels of writing quality. For this purpose, a corpus of argumentative essays by EFL learners was compiled and then the essays were rated and placed into three groups of high-rated, mid-rated, and low-rated essays. The corpus was then coded and analysed for both phrasal and clausal features. The phrasal features were manually coded based on the development scheme hypothesized by Biber, Gray and Poonpon (2011) for academic writing, and the clausal features were analysed using the online L2 Syntactic Complexity Analyzer developed by Lu (2010). A separate ANOVA test was used to compare the three groups of essays for each of the phrasal and clausal features. The findings of the current study demonstrated that subordination and dependent clauses were not good indicators of different writing qualities in our corpus. Also, the pattern of noun phrase complexity predicted by Biber et al. (2011) was not observed across argumentative essays from three different levels of writing quality. corpus linguistics phrasal features argumentative essays efl learners t-unit Philology. Linguistics Ahmadi Hesamoddin Shahriari verfasserin aut Ghonsooly Behzad verfasserin aut In Topics in Linguistics Sciendo, 2015 20(2019), 1, Seite 68-81 (DE-627)862946905 (DE-600)2861555-4 21996504 nnns volume:20 year:2019 number:1 pages:68-81 https://doi.org/10.2478/topling-2019-0005 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/40dec620a99a41c3a54d1f80924f0f21 kostenfrei https://doi.org/10.2478/topling-2019-0005 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1337-7590 Journal toc kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2199-6504 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4392 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 20 2019 1 68-81
allfieldsGer	10.2478/topling-2019-0005 doi (DE-627)DOAJ025550829 (DE-599)DOAJ40dec620a99a41c3a54d1f80924f0f21 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng P1-1091 Shadloo Farzaneh verfasserin aut Exploring syntactic complexity and its relationship with writing quality in EFL argumentative essays 2019 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier To predict syntactic complexity in second/foreign language writing, some studies have advocated the use of T-unit and clausal subordination measures while others have argued for the use of phrase-based measures. This study seeks to identify syntactic features that can be regarded as discriminators among different levels of writing quality. For this purpose, a corpus of argumentative essays by EFL learners was compiled and then the essays were rated and placed into three groups of high-rated, mid-rated, and low-rated essays. The corpus was then coded and analysed for both phrasal and clausal features. The phrasal features were manually coded based on the development scheme hypothesized by Biber, Gray and Poonpon (2011) for academic writing, and the clausal features were analysed using the online L2 Syntactic Complexity Analyzer developed by Lu (2010). A separate ANOVA test was used to compare the three groups of essays for each of the phrasal and clausal features. The findings of the current study demonstrated that subordination and dependent clauses were not good indicators of different writing qualities in our corpus. Also, the pattern of noun phrase complexity predicted by Biber et al. (2011) was not observed across argumentative essays from three different levels of writing quality. corpus linguistics phrasal features argumentative essays efl learners t-unit Philology. Linguistics Ahmadi Hesamoddin Shahriari verfasserin aut Ghonsooly Behzad verfasserin aut In Topics in Linguistics Sciendo, 2015 20(2019), 1, Seite 68-81 (DE-627)862946905 (DE-600)2861555-4 21996504 nnns volume:20 year:2019 number:1 pages:68-81 https://doi.org/10.2478/topling-2019-0005 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/40dec620a99a41c3a54d1f80924f0f21 kostenfrei https://doi.org/10.2478/topling-2019-0005 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1337-7590 Journal toc kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2199-6504 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4392 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 20 2019 1 68-81
allfieldsSound	10.2478/topling-2019-0005 doi (DE-627)DOAJ025550829 (DE-599)DOAJ40dec620a99a41c3a54d1f80924f0f21 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng P1-1091 Shadloo Farzaneh verfasserin aut Exploring syntactic complexity and its relationship with writing quality in EFL argumentative essays 2019 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier To predict syntactic complexity in second/foreign language writing, some studies have advocated the use of T-unit and clausal subordination measures while others have argued for the use of phrase-based measures. This study seeks to identify syntactic features that can be regarded as discriminators among different levels of writing quality. For this purpose, a corpus of argumentative essays by EFL learners was compiled and then the essays were rated and placed into three groups of high-rated, mid-rated, and low-rated essays. The corpus was then coded and analysed for both phrasal and clausal features. The phrasal features were manually coded based on the development scheme hypothesized by Biber, Gray and Poonpon (2011) for academic writing, and the clausal features were analysed using the online L2 Syntactic Complexity Analyzer developed by Lu (2010). A separate ANOVA test was used to compare the three groups of essays for each of the phrasal and clausal features. The findings of the current study demonstrated that subordination and dependent clauses were not good indicators of different writing qualities in our corpus. Also, the pattern of noun phrase complexity predicted by Biber et al. (2011) was not observed across argumentative essays from three different levels of writing quality. corpus linguistics phrasal features argumentative essays efl learners t-unit Philology. Linguistics Ahmadi Hesamoddin Shahriari verfasserin aut Ghonsooly Behzad verfasserin aut In Topics in Linguistics Sciendo, 2015 20(2019), 1, Seite 68-81 (DE-627)862946905 (DE-600)2861555-4 21996504 nnns volume:20 year:2019 number:1 pages:68-81 https://doi.org/10.2478/topling-2019-0005 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/40dec620a99a41c3a54d1f80924f0f21 kostenfrei https://doi.org/10.2478/topling-2019-0005 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1337-7590 Journal toc kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2199-6504 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4392 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 20 2019 1 68-81
language	English
source	In Topics in Linguistics 20(2019), 1, Seite 68-81 volume:20 year:2019 number:1 pages:68-81
sourceStr	In Topics in Linguistics 20(2019), 1, Seite 68-81 volume:20 year:2019 number:1 pages:68-81
format_phy_str_mv	Article
institution	findex.gbv.de
topic_facet	corpus linguistics phrasal features argumentative essays efl learners t-unit Philology. Linguistics
isfreeaccess_bool	true
container_title	Topics in Linguistics
authorswithroles_txt_mv	Shadloo Farzaneh @@aut@@ Ahmadi Hesamoddin Shahriari @@aut@@ Ghonsooly Behzad @@aut@@
publishDateDaySort_date	2019-01-01T00:00:00Z
hierarchy_top_id	862946905
id	DOAJ025550829
language_de	englisch
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ025550829</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20240414123933.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230226s2019 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.2478/topling-2019-0005</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ025550829</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJ40dec620a99a41c3a54d1f80924f0f21</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">P1-1091</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Shadloo Farzaneh</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Exploring syntactic complexity and its relationship with writing quality in EFL argumentative essays</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2019</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">To predict syntactic complexity in second/foreign language writing, some studies have advocated the use of T-unit and clausal subordination measures while others have argued for the use of phrase-based measures. This study seeks to identify syntactic features that can be regarded as discriminators among different levels of writing quality. For this purpose, a corpus of argumentative essays by EFL learners was compiled and then the essays were rated and placed into three groups of high-rated, mid-rated, and low-rated essays. The corpus was then coded and analysed for both phrasal and clausal features. The phrasal features were manually coded based on the development scheme hypothesized by Biber, Gray and Poonpon (2011) for academic writing, and the clausal features were analysed using the online L2 Syntactic Complexity Analyzer developed by Lu (2010). A separate ANOVA test was used to compare the three groups of essays for each of the phrasal and clausal features. The findings of the current study demonstrated that subordination and dependent clauses were not good indicators of different writing qualities in our corpus. Also, the pattern of noun phrase complexity predicted by Biber et al. (2011) was not observed across argumentative essays from three different levels of writing quality.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">corpus linguistics</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">phrasal features</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">argumentative essays</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">efl learners</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">t-unit</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Philology. Linguistics</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ahmadi Hesamoddin Shahriari</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ghonsooly Behzad</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Topics in Linguistics</subfield><subfield code="d">Sciendo, 2015</subfield><subfield code="g">20(2019), 1, Seite 68-81</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)862946905</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2861555-4</subfield><subfield code="x">21996504</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:20</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2019</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:68-81</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.2478/topling-2019-0005</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/40dec620a99a41c3a54d1f80924f0f21</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.2478/topling-2019-0005</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/1337-7590</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/2199-6504</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_32</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2065</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2093</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4392</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">20</subfield><subfield code="j">2019</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="h">68-81</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
callnumber-first	P - Language and Literature
author	Shadloo Farzaneh
spellingShingle	Shadloo Farzaneh misc P1-1091 misc corpus linguistics misc phrasal features misc argumentative essays misc efl learners misc t-unit misc Philology. Linguistics Exploring syntactic complexity and its relationship with writing quality in EFL argumentative essays
authorStr	Shadloo Farzaneh
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv	@@773@@(DE-627)862946905
format	electronic Article
delete_txt_mv	keep
author_role	aut aut aut
collection	DOAJ
remote_str	true
callnumber-label	P1-1091
illustrated	Not Illustrated
issn	21996504
topic_title	P1-1091 Exploring syntactic complexity and its relationship with writing quality in EFL argumentative essays corpus linguistics phrasal features argumentative essays efl learners t-unit
topic	misc P1-1091 misc corpus linguistics misc phrasal features misc argumentative essays misc efl learners misc t-unit misc Philology. Linguistics
topic_unstemmed	misc P1-1091 misc corpus linguistics misc phrasal features misc argumentative essays misc efl learners misc t-unit misc Philology. Linguistics
topic_browse	misc P1-1091 misc corpus linguistics misc phrasal features misc argumentative essays misc efl learners misc t-unit misc Philology. Linguistics
format_facet	Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource
format_main_str_mv	Text Zeitschrift/Artikel
carriertype_str_mv	cr
hierarchy_parent_title	Topics in Linguistics
hierarchy_parent_id	862946905
hierarchy_top_title	Topics in Linguistics
isfreeaccess_txt	true
familylinks_str_mv	(DE-627)862946905 (DE-600)2861555-4
title	Exploring syntactic complexity and its relationship with writing quality in EFL argumentative essays
ctrlnum	(DE-627)DOAJ025550829 (DE-599)DOAJ40dec620a99a41c3a54d1f80924f0f21
title_full	Exploring syntactic complexity and its relationship with writing quality in EFL argumentative essays
author_sort	Shadloo Farzaneh
journal	Topics in Linguistics
journalStr	Topics in Linguistics
callnumber-first-code	P
lang_code	eng
isOA_bool	true
recordtype	marc
publishDateSort	2019
contenttype_str_mv	txt
container_start_page	68
author_browse	Shadloo Farzaneh Ahmadi Hesamoddin Shahriari Ghonsooly Behzad
container_volume	20
class	P1-1091
format_se	Elektronische Aufsätze
author-letter	Shadloo Farzaneh
doi_str_mv	10.2478/topling-2019-0005
author2-role	verfasserin
title_sort	exploring syntactic complexity and its relationship with writing quality in efl argumentative essays
callnumber	P1-1091
title_auth	Exploring syntactic complexity and its relationship with writing quality in EFL argumentative essays
abstract	To predict syntactic complexity in second/foreign language writing, some studies have advocated the use of T-unit and clausal subordination measures while others have argued for the use of phrase-based measures. This study seeks to identify syntactic features that can be regarded as discriminators among different levels of writing quality. For this purpose, a corpus of argumentative essays by EFL learners was compiled and then the essays were rated and placed into three groups of high-rated, mid-rated, and low-rated essays. The corpus was then coded and analysed for both phrasal and clausal features. The phrasal features were manually coded based on the development scheme hypothesized by Biber, Gray and Poonpon (2011) for academic writing, and the clausal features were analysed using the online L2 Syntactic Complexity Analyzer developed by Lu (2010). A separate ANOVA test was used to compare the three groups of essays for each of the phrasal and clausal features. The findings of the current study demonstrated that subordination and dependent clauses were not good indicators of different writing qualities in our corpus. Also, the pattern of noun phrase complexity predicted by Biber et al. (2011) was not observed across argumentative essays from three different levels of writing quality.
abstractGer	To predict syntactic complexity in second/foreign language writing, some studies have advocated the use of T-unit and clausal subordination measures while others have argued for the use of phrase-based measures. This study seeks to identify syntactic features that can be regarded as discriminators among different levels of writing quality. For this purpose, a corpus of argumentative essays by EFL learners was compiled and then the essays were rated and placed into three groups of high-rated, mid-rated, and low-rated essays. The corpus was then coded and analysed for both phrasal and clausal features. The phrasal features were manually coded based on the development scheme hypothesized by Biber, Gray and Poonpon (2011) for academic writing, and the clausal features were analysed using the online L2 Syntactic Complexity Analyzer developed by Lu (2010). A separate ANOVA test was used to compare the three groups of essays for each of the phrasal and clausal features. The findings of the current study demonstrated that subordination and dependent clauses were not good indicators of different writing qualities in our corpus. Also, the pattern of noun phrase complexity predicted by Biber et al. (2011) was not observed across argumentative essays from three different levels of writing quality.
abstract_unstemmed	To predict syntactic complexity in second/foreign language writing, some studies have advocated the use of T-unit and clausal subordination measures while others have argued for the use of phrase-based measures. This study seeks to identify syntactic features that can be regarded as discriminators among different levels of writing quality. For this purpose, a corpus of argumentative essays by EFL learners was compiled and then the essays were rated and placed into three groups of high-rated, mid-rated, and low-rated essays. The corpus was then coded and analysed for both phrasal and clausal features. The phrasal features were manually coded based on the development scheme hypothesized by Biber, Gray and Poonpon (2011) for academic writing, and the clausal features were analysed using the online L2 Syntactic Complexity Analyzer developed by Lu (2010). A separate ANOVA test was used to compare the three groups of essays for each of the phrasal and clausal features. The findings of the current study demonstrated that subordination and dependent clauses were not good indicators of different writing qualities in our corpus. Also, the pattern of noun phrase complexity predicted by Biber et al. (2011) was not observed across argumentative essays from three different levels of writing quality.
collection_details	GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2065 GBV_ILN_2093 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4392 GBV_ILN_4700
container_issue	1
title_short	Exploring syntactic complexity and its relationship with writing quality in EFL argumentative essays
url	https://doi.org/10.2478/topling-2019-0005 https://doaj.org/article/40dec620a99a41c3a54d1f80924f0f21 https://doaj.org/toc/1337-7590 https://doaj.org/toc/2199-6504
remote_bool	true
author2	Ahmadi Hesamoddin Shahriari Ghonsooly Behzad
author2Str	Ahmadi Hesamoddin Shahriari Ghonsooly Behzad
ppnlink	862946905
callnumber-subject	P - Philology and Linguistics
mediatype_str_mv	c
isOA_txt	true
hochschulschrift_bool	false
doi_str	10.2478/topling-2019-0005
callnumber-a	P1-1091
up_date	2024-07-03T15:40:57.581Z
_version_	1803573010197643264
fullrecord_marcxml	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ025550829</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20240414123933.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230226s2019 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.2478/topling-2019-0005</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ025550829</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJ40dec620a99a41c3a54d1f80924f0f21</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">P1-1091</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Shadloo Farzaneh</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Exploring syntactic complexity and its relationship with writing quality in EFL argumentative essays</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2019</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">To predict syntactic complexity in second/foreign language writing, some studies have advocated the use of T-unit and clausal subordination measures while others have argued for the use of phrase-based measures. This study seeks to identify syntactic features that can be regarded as discriminators among different levels of writing quality. For this purpose, a corpus of argumentative essays by EFL learners was compiled and then the essays were rated and placed into three groups of high-rated, mid-rated, and low-rated essays. The corpus was then coded and analysed for both phrasal and clausal features. The phrasal features were manually coded based on the development scheme hypothesized by Biber, Gray and Poonpon (2011) for academic writing, and the clausal features were analysed using the online L2 Syntactic Complexity Analyzer developed by Lu (2010). A separate ANOVA test was used to compare the three groups of essays for each of the phrasal and clausal features. The findings of the current study demonstrated that subordination and dependent clauses were not good indicators of different writing qualities in our corpus. Also, the pattern of noun phrase complexity predicted by Biber et al. (2011) was not observed across argumentative essays from three different levels of writing quality.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">corpus linguistics</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">phrasal features</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">argumentative essays</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">efl learners</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">t-unit</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Philology. Linguistics</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ahmadi Hesamoddin Shahriari</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ghonsooly Behzad</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Topics in Linguistics</subfield><subfield code="d">Sciendo, 2015</subfield><subfield code="g">20(2019), 1, Seite 68-81</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)862946905</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2861555-4</subfield><subfield code="x">21996504</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:20</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2019</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:68-81</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.2478/topling-2019-0005</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/40dec620a99a41c3a54d1f80924f0f21</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.2478/topling-2019-0005</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/1337-7590</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/2199-6504</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_32</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2065</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2093</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4392</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">20</subfield><subfield code="j">2019</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="h">68-81</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
score	7.400567

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

Exploring syntactic complexity and its relationship with writing quality in EFL argumentative essays

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?