LEXICAL COMPLEXITY IN THE INTRODUCTIONS OF UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS’ RESEARCH ARTICLES
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26618/exposure.v6i2.1179Keywords:
lexical complexity, research articles, undergraduate students,Abstract
Lexical complexity refers to the various different words employed in the introductions of the undergraduate students’ research articles. The implementation of lexical complexity describes the writers’ overall development of lexical complexity use in the target language. This study aims to find out the employment of lexical complexity in the introductions of undergraduate students’ research articles. It utilized a quantitative design through corpus based analysis.The corpus studied consisted of 134 introductions of undergraduate students’ research articles. The data were analyzed using Web-based Lexical Complexity Analyzer. Then to decide the level of complexity applied in the students’ articles, the results were compared to the lexical complexity of Chinese learners’ oral narratives. The findings show that lexical density, lexical sophistication, and lexical variation are high except for verb variation, noun variation, adjective variation, adverb variation and modifier variation (cf. Lu, 2010, 2012; Ai & Lu, 2013). It is expected that this article could provide information about the lexical complexity which is needed to be improved in the undergraduate students’ research articles.
Downloads
References
Afini & Cahyono, B.Y. 2012. The Lexical Richness in Narrative Texts of XI Graders of MAN 3 Malang. English Language Education, 1(1). (Online), (http://journal-online.um.ac.id), accessed February 23, 2013.
Ai, H. & Lu, X. 2010. A Web-based System for Automatic Measurement of Lexical Complexity. Paper presented at 27th Annual Symposium of the Computer Assisted Language Concortium (CALICO-10). (Online), (http://www.personal.psu.edu/hua126/papers/calico10_ai_lu.pdf), accessed February 23, 2013.
Brown, H.D. 2007(3rd ed.). Teaching by Principles: an Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. New York: San Fransisco State University. (http://moodle.adaptland.it/pluginfile.php/4930/mod_resource/content/1/329WP_08_71.pdf), accessed March 23, 2013.
Francis, W.S., Romo, L.F. & Gelman, R. 2002. Syntactic Structure, Grammatical Accuracy, and Content in Second-Language Writing: An Analysis of Skill Learning and On-line Processing. Bilingual Sentence Processing, (Online) (academics.utep.edu/Portals/321/.../Francis/FrancisRomoGelman02.pdf), accessed March 01, 2013.
Hinkel, E. (2003). Simplicity without Elegance: Features of Sentences in L2 and L1 Academic Texts. TESOL Quarterly, 37: 275–301. (Online), (http://www.elihinkel.org/dowloads.htm), accessed March 01, 2013.
Hinkel, E. 2005. Analyses of second language (L2) Texts and What can be Learnt from them. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 615_628. (Online) (http://www.elihinkel.org/dowloads.htm), accessed March 01, 2013.
Hinkel, E. 2011. What Research on Second Language Writing Tells us and What it doesn’t. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning, 2: 523-538 New York: Routlege. (http://www.elihinkel.org/dowloads.htm), accessed March 01, 2013.
Larsen-Freeman, D. 2006. The Emergence of Complexity, Fluency, and Accuracy in the Oral and Written Production of Five Chinese Learners of English. Applied Linguistics, 27(4): 590-619. @Oxford University Press. (Online), (www.pebc.org/.../Larsen-Freeman-Complxty-Fluncy-Accrcy-in-Oral-Wt...)
Laufer, B. 1994. The Lexical Profile of Second Language Writing: Does it Chang over Time?. RELC Journal, 25, 21-33.
Laufer, B & Nation, P. 1995.Vocabulary Size and Use: Lexical Richness in L2 Written Production. Applied Linguistics, 16 (3): 307-322. Oxford University Press.
Lu, X. 2012. The Relationship of Lexical Richness to the Quality of ESL Learners’ Oral Narratives. The Modern Language Journal. 96(2): 190-208.
Nation, I.S.P. 2001. Learning Vocabulary in Another Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Naves, T. 2007. Analytical Measurers of Learners’ Written Language. Barcelona: University of Barcelona, English Department. (Online), (www.ub.edu/GRAL/pubs/Celaya&Naves2009Writing.pdf).
Šišková, Z. 2012. Lexical Richness in EFL Students’ Narratives. University of Reading: Language Studies Working Papers. ISSN 2040-3461, 4: 26-36. (Online)
(http://www.readingconnect.net/web/files/english-language-and-literature/elal_lswp_vol_4_siskova.pdf ), accessed 13/04/2013.
Wolfe-Quintero, K., Inagaki, S., & Kim, H.Y. 1998. Second Language Development in Writing: Measurers of Fluency, Accuracy, & Complexity. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
In order to assure the highest standards for published articles, a peer review policy is applied. In pursue of the compliance with academic standards, all parties involved in the publishing process (the authors, the editors and the editorial board and the reviewers) agree to meet the responsibilities stated below in accordance to the Journal publication ethics and malpractice statement.
Duties of Authors:
- The author(s) warrant that the submitted article is an original work, which has not been previously published, and that they have obtained an agreement from any co-author(s) prior to the manuscript’s submission;
- The author(s) should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal;
- The authors(s) make certain that the manuscript meets the terms of the Manuscript Submission Guideline regarding appropriate academic citation and that no copyright infringement occurs;
- The authors(s) should inform the editors about any conflict of interests and report any errors they subsequently, discover in their manuscript.
Duties of Editors and the Editorial Board:
- The editors, together with the editorial board, are responsible for deciding upon the publication or rejection of the submitted manuscripts based only on their originality, significance, and relevance to the domains of the journal;
- The editors evaluate the manuscripts compliance with academic criteria, the domains of the journal and the guidelines;
- The editors must at all times respect the confidentiality of any information pertaining to the submitted manuscripts;
- The editors assign the review of each manuscript to two reviewers chosen according to their domains of expertise. The editors must take into account any conflict of interest reported by the authors and the reviewers.
- The editors must ensure that the comments and recommendations of the reviewers are sent to the author(s) in due time and that the manuscripts are returned to the editors, who take the final decision to publish them or not.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a pre-publication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (see The Effect of Open Access). Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
