Fine-grained measures of syntactic complexity in the discussion section of research articles: The effect of discipline and language background

Abstract

Previous research on syntactic complexity in academic writing has mostly examined traditional large-grained indices to capture this construct, measuring complexity at clause or sentence level. However, due to the heavier reliance of academic writing on complex noun phrases, these traditional indices of syntactic complexity are not adequate for operationalizing this linguistic feature in academic writing. Therefore, the present research used fine-grained phrasal and clausal indices to investigate syntactic complexity in the discussion section of research articles (RAs) in three disciplines, namely applied linguistics, chemistry, and economics. In addition, texts from two groups of writers, L1-English authors and L2-English authors, were compared with respect to clausal and phrasal indices. Nine indices of clausal complexity and thirteen indices of phrasal complexity were examined. The findings revealed significant disciplinary differences in both types of complexity. It was found that in clausal measures, applied linguistics and economics discussions were generally more complex than those of chemistry, while in phrasal measures chemistry texts were generally more complex than those of applied linguistics and economics. However, the picture related to L1 vs. L2 differences was not that clear. The results are discussed and theoretical and pedagogical implications are offered.