Abstract
As an important index of working memory burden and syntactic difficulty, Dependency Distance (DD) has been fruitfully applied in the context of Second Language Acquisition (SLA) to both native and non-native language production. Recent research has focused on DD as a predictor of writing performance across different proficiencies, while the other modality of second language (L2) performance – speaking – has been largely neglected. Moreover, while previous results reported significant positive correlations between DD and writing proficiency, a lack of control for important variables such as sentence/text length may have potentially inflated the outcomes of the analyses. In this study, we examine the effects of DD across the different modalities and proficiency levels, controlling for the effects of text and sentence lengths. Results from statistical analysis show that the mean DD of L2 writing is significantly shorter than L2 speech production, indicating that L2 writing may be a cognitively more demanding task than L2 speaking. Additionally, while significant statistical differences in DD were found across proficiency levels in both L2 writing and speech, the significance disappeared after controlling for sentence and text length. The implications of the present study for future research on DD in SLA are discussed.
References
Al-Shehri, Saleh & Christina Gitsaki. 2010. Online reading: a preliminary study of the impact of integrated and split-attention formats on L2 students’ cognitive load. ReCALL 22(3). 356–375. doi:10.1017/s0958344010000212.10.1017/S0958344010000212Search in Google Scholar
Bartek, Brian, Richard L. Lewis, Shravan Vasishth & Mason R. Smith. 2011. In search of on-line locality effects in sentence comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 37(5). 1178–1198. doi:10.1037/a0024194. http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/a0024194.Search in Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Bethany Gray & Kornwipa Poonpon. 2011. Should we use characteristics of conversation to measure grammatical complexity in L2 writing development? TESOL Quarterly 45(1). 5–35. doi:10.5054/tq.2011.244483.10.5054/tq.2011.244483Search in Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Bethany Gray & Shelley Staples. 2016. Predicting Patterns of Grammatical Complexity Across Language Exam Task Types and Proficiency Levels. Applied Linguistics 37(5). 639–668. doi:10.1093/applin/amu059.10.1093/applin/amu059Search in Google Scholar
Blanchard, Daniel, James Carlson, Brent Bridgeman, Marna Golub-smith & Ruth Greenwood. 2013. TOEFL11 : A Corpus of Non-Native English. ETS Research Report Series 2. i–15.10.1002/j.2333-8504.2013.tb02331.xSearch in Google Scholar
Bulté, Bram & Alex Housen. 2014. Conceptualizing and measuring short-term changes in L2 writing complexity. Journal of Second Language Writing 26. 42–65. doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2014.09.005. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1060374314000666.10.1016/j.jslw.2014.09.005Search in Google Scholar
Chen, Danqi & Christopher Manning. 2014. A fast and accurate dependency parser using neural networks. Proceedings of the 2014 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing (EMNLP), 740–750.Search in Google Scholar
Cho, Minyoung. 2018. Task complexity, modality, and working memory in L2 task performance. System. Elsevier Ltd 72. 85–98. doi:10.1016/j.system.2017.10.010. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2017.10.010.10.1016/j.system.2017.10.010Search in Google Scholar
Chodorow, Martin & Jill Burstein. 2004. Beyond Essay Length: Evaluating E-Rater®’S Performance on Toefl® Essays. ETS Research Report Series. doi:10.1002/j.2333-8504.2004.tb01931.x.10.1002/j.2333-8504.2004.tb01931.xSearch in Google Scholar
Cleland, Alexandra A. & Martin J. Pickering. 2006. Do writing and speaking employ the same syntactic representations? Journal of Memory and Language 54(2). 185–198. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2005.10.003. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0749596X05001269.10.1016/j.jml.2005.10.003Search in Google Scholar
Cowan, Nelson. 1999. An embedded-processes model ofworking memory. In Akira Miyake & Priti Shah (eds.), Models ofWorking Memory: Mechanisms ofActive Maintenance and Executive Control, 62–101. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139174909.006Search in Google Scholar
Crossley, Scott. 2013. Applications of Text Analysis Tools for Spoken Response Grading. Language Learning & Technology 17(172). 171–192. http://llt.msu.edu/issues/june2013/crossleymcnamara.pdf.Search in Google Scholar
Crossley, Scott & Danielle McNamara. 2012. Predicting second language writing proficiency: the roles of cohesion and linguistic sophistication. Journal of Research in Reading 35(2). 115–135. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9817.2010.01449.x. http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/j.1467-9817.2010.01449.x.10.1111/j.1467-9817.2010.01449.xSearch in Google Scholar
Crossley, Scott & Danielle McNamara. 2014. Does writing development equal writing quality? A computational investigation of syntactic complexity in L2 learners. Journal of Second Language Writing. Elsevier Inc. 26. 66–79. doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2014.09.006. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2014.09.006.10.1016/j.jslw.2014.09.006Search in Google Scholar
Ellis, Nick C. 1996. Sequencing in SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 18(1). 91–126. doi:10.1017/S0272263100014698. https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0272263100014698/type/journal_article.10.1017/S0272263100014698Search in Google Scholar
Fang, Yu & Haitao Liu. 2018. What factors are associated with dependency distances to ensure easy comprehension? A case study of ba sentences in Mandarin Chinese. Language Sciences. Elsevier Ltd 67. 33–45. doi:10.1016/j.langsci.2018.04.005. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2018.04.005.10.1016/j.langsci.2018.04.005Search in Google Scholar
Fedorenko, Evelina, Rebecca Woodbury & Edward Gibson. 2013. Direct Evidence of Memory Retrieval as a Source of Difficulty in Non-Local Dependencies in Language. Cognitive Science 37(2). 378–394. doi:10.1111/cogs.12021. http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/cogs.12021.10.1111/cogs.12021Search in Google Scholar
Ferrer-i-Cancho, Ramon & Haitao Liu. 2014. The risks of mixing dependency lengths from sequences of different length. Glottotheory 5(2). 143–155. doi:10.1515/glot-2014-0014.10.1515/glot-2014-0014Search in Google Scholar
Ferris, Dana R. 1994. Lexical and Syntactic Features of ESL Writing by Students at Different Levels of L2 Proficiency. TESOL Quarterly 28(2). 414–420. doi:10.2307/3587446.10.2307/3587446Search in Google Scholar
Geertzen, Jeroen, Theodora Alexopoulou & Anna Korhonen. 2013. Automatic Linguistic Annotation of Large Scale L2 Databases: The EF-Cambridge Open Language Database (EFCamDat). Proceedings of the 31st Second Language Research Forum (SLRF), 240–254. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Search in Google Scholar
Gibson, Edward. 2000. The dependency locality theory: A distance-based theory of linguistic complexity. In Wayne A. O’Neil, Yasushi Miyashita & Alec Marantz (eds.), Image, Language, Brain: Papers from the First Mind Articulation Project Symposium, 95–126.Search in Google Scholar
Graesser, Arthur C., Danielle S. McNamara & Jonna M. Kulikowich. 2011. Coh-Metrix. Educational Researcher 40(5). 223–234. doi:10.3102/0013189X11413260. http://edr.sagepub.com/cgi/doi/10.3102/0013189X11413260.10.3102/0013189X11413260Search in Google Scholar
Greenbaum, Sidney & Gerald Nelson. 1995. Clause relationships in spoken and written English. Functions of Language 2(1). 1–21. doi:10.1075/fol.2.1.02gre. http://www.jbe-platform.com/content/journals/10.1075/fol.2.1.02gre.10.1075/fol.2.1.02greSearch in Google Scholar
Hoang, Ha & Frank Boers. 2018. Gauging the association of EFL learners’ writing proficiency and their use of metaphorical language. System. Elsevier Ltd 74. 1–8. doi:10.1016/j.system.2018.02.004. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2018.02.004.10.1016/j.system.2018.02.004Search in Google Scholar
Housen, Alex, Folkert Kuiken & Ineke Vedder (eds.). 2012. Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency: Complexity, accuracy and fluency in SLA. John Benjamins Publishing.10.1075/lllt.32Search in Google Scholar
Hudson, Richard. 2010. An introduction to word grammar. Cambridge University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199738632.013.0019Search in Google Scholar
Jiang, Jingyang & Haitao Liu. 2015. The effects of sentence length on dependency distance, dependency direction and the implications-Based on a parallel English-Chinese dependency treebank. Language Sciences. Elsevier Ltd 50(866). 93–104. doi:10.1016/j.langsci.2015.04.002. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2015.04.002.10.1016/j.langsci.2015.04.002Search in Google Scholar
Jiang, Jingyang & Jinghui Ouyang. 2017. Dependency distance: A new perspective on the syntactic development in second language acquisition: Comment on “Dependency distance: A new perspective on syntactic patterns in natural language” by Haitao Liu et al. Physics of Life Reviews. Elsevier B.V. 21. 209–210. doi:10.1016/j.plrev.2017.06.018. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.plrev.2017.06.018.10.1016/j.plrev.2017.06.018Search in Google Scholar
Kirkland, Margaret R. & Mary Anne P. Saunders. 1991. Maximizing Student Performance in Summary Writing: Managing Cognitive Load. TESOL Quarterly 25(1). 105. doi:10.2307/3587030. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3587030?origin=crossref.10.2307/3587030Search in Google Scholar
Klein, Dan, Christopher D. Manning. & Christopher D. Manning. 2003. Accurate unlexicalized parsing. Proceedings of the 41st Annual Meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics, 423–430. Stroudsburg, PA, USA: Association for Computational Linguistics.10.3115/1075096.1075150Search in Google Scholar
Levy, Roger, Evelina Fedorenko, Mara Breen & Edward Gibson. 2012. The processing of extraposed structures in English. Cognition 122(1). 12–36. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2011.07.012. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0010027711002010.10.1016/j.cognition.2011.07.012Search in Google Scholar
Liu, Haitao. 2008. Dependency distance as a metric of language comprehension difficulty. Journal of Cognitive Science 9(2). 159–191. http://www.papersearch.net/view/detail.asp?detail_key=1r300030.10.17791/jcs.2008.9.2.159Search in Google Scholar
Liu, Haitao, Chunshan Xu & Junying Liang. 2017. Dependency distance: A new perspective on syntactic patterns in natural languages. Physics of Life Reviews. Elsevier B.V. 21. 171–193. doi:10.1016/j.plrev.2017.03.002. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.plrev.2017.03.002.10.1016/j.plrev.2017.03.002Search in Google Scholar
Lu, Xiaofei. 2011. A Corpus-Based Evaluation of Syntactic Complexity Measures as Indices of College-Level ESL Writers’ Language Development. TESOL Quarterly 45(1). 36–62. doi:10.5054/tq.2011.240859. http://openurl.ingenta.com/content/xref?genre=article&issn=0039-8322&volume=45&issue=1&spage=36.10.5054/tq.2011.240859Search in Google Scholar
Oomen, Claudy & Albert Postma. 2001. Effects of time pressure on mechanisms of speech production and self-monitoring. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 30(2). 163–184.10.1023/A:1010377828778Search in Google Scholar
Ouyang, Jinghui & Jingyang Jiang. 2018. Can the Probability Distribution of Dependency Distance Measure Language Proficiency of Second Language Learners? Journal of Quantitative Linguistics. Routledge 25(4). 295–313. doi:10.1080/09 296174.2017.1373991. http://doi.org/10.1080/09296174.2017.1373991.10.1080/09296174.2017.1373991Search in Google Scholar
Paas, Fred, Juhani E. Tuovinen, Huib Tabbers & Pascal W. M. Van Gerven. 2003. Cognitive Load Measurement as a Means to Advance Cognitive Load Theory. Educational Psychologist 38(1). 63–71. doi:10.1207/S15326985EP3801_8. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/S15326985EP3801_8.10.1207/S15326985EP3801_8Search in Google Scholar
Qin, Wenjuan & Paola Uccelli. 2016. Same language, different functions: A cross-genre analysis of Chinese EFL learners’ writing performance. Journal of Second Language Writing. Elsevier Inc. 33. 3–17. doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2016.06.001. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2016.06.001.10.1016/j.jslw.2016.06.001Search in Google Scholar
Sweller, John. 2011. Cognitive Load Theory. Psychology of learning and motivation, 37–76. Academic Press. doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-387691-1.00002-8. https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/B9780123876911000028.Search in Google Scholar
Tesnière, Lucien. 1959. Eléments de syntaxe structurale. Paris: Klincksieck.Search in Google Scholar
Wagner, Elvis. 2014. Using Unscripted Spoken Texts in the Teaching of Second Language Listening. TESOL Journal 5(2). 288–311. doi:10.1002/tesj.120. http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tesj.120.10.1002/tesj.120Search in Google Scholar
Wang, Yaqin & Haitao Liu. 2017. The effects of genre on dependency distance and dependency direction. Language Sciences. Elsevier Ltd 59(866). 135–147. doi:10.1016/j.langsci.2016.09.006. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2016.09.006.10.1016/j.langsci.2016.09.006Search in Google Scholar
Wolfe, Edward W., Tian Song & Hong Jiao. 2015. Features of difficult-to-score essays. Assessing Writing. Elsevier Inc. 27. 1–10. doi:10.1016/j.asw.2015.06.002. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2015.06.002.10.1016/j.asw.2015.06.002Search in Google Scholar
Zipf, George Kingsley. 1949. Human behavior and the principle of least effort: an introduction to human ecology. New York: Hafner.Search in Google Scholar
© 2019 Hengbin Yan et al., published by De Gruyter
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Public License.
