Syntactic complexity development in the writings of EFL learners: Insights from a dependency syntactically-annotated corpus.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Usage of different modifiers can serve as developmental indicators for young beginner learners progressing from pre-attributive modifiers to post-phrasal and clausal modifiers.
“Jiang et al. (2019) found that usage of different modifiers can serve as developmental indicators for the young beginner learners progressing from pre-attributive modifiers to post-phrasal and clausal modifiers.”
From Dynamic development of syntactic complexity in second language writing: A longitudinal case study of a young Chinese EFL learner (2022) · cites this paper as Jiang et al. (2019)
There are significant differences between MLS, MLT, and DC/T in the writing of beginners and intermediate English learners.
“According to the findings of Jiang et al. (2019), there are significant differences between MLS, MLT, DC/T in the writing of beginners and intermediate English learners.”
From Dynamic development of syntactic complexity in second language writing: A longitudinal case study of a young Chinese EFL learner (2022) · cites this paper as Jiang et al. (2019)
The use of adverbs is a strong discriminator of different proficiency levels or indicator of language development.
“The use of adverbs is a strong discriminator of different proficiency levels or indicator of language development”
From Dynamic development of syntactic complexity in second language writing: A longitudinal case study of a young Chinese EFL learner (2022) · cites this paper as Jiang et al. (2019)
Even advanced English learners are obviously less likely to use adverbs than native speakers.
“because even advanced English learners are obviously less likely to use adverbs than native speakers.”
From Dynamic development of syntactic complexity in second language writing: A longitudinal case study of a young Chinese EFL learner (2022) · cites this paper as Jiang et al. (2019)
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 57 · Cited by 109
- Authors
- Jiang, J., Bi, P., & Liu, H.
- Affiliations
- Zhejiang University (CN)
- Beijing Language and Culture University (CN)
- Corresponding author
- Liu, Haitao
- Venue
- Journal of Second Language Writing
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-12
- Volume
- 46
- Pages
- 100666
- ISSN
- 1060-3743 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2971611752
- Cited by
- 109
- References
- 57
- Citations by year
- 2026: 20 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 4
- FWCI
- 14.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Second Language Writing (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Social Science Foundation of China (17AYY021)
- Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities
- Zhejiang University Liberal Arts Teachers’ Teaching and Research Development Special Funding
- Guangdong University of Foreign Studies
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Discourse Analysis in Language Studies
- Keywords
- syntactic complexity, EFL writing, writing skills, subordinate clauses, coordinate clauses, noun phrases, T-unit length, relative clauses, adverbial clauses, compound nouns, narrative writing, second language learners
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
