MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2338913574 · doi:10.14288/1.0078320

The effect of mode variation on syntactic complexity in adult E.S.L. composition writing

2010· article· en· W2338913574 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicText Readability and Simplification
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComposition (language)Variation (astronomy)Mode (computer interface)LinguisticsComputer sciencePhilosophyHuman–computer interactionPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to determine whether variation in mode of discourse would produce significant differences in syntactic complexity, as measured by mean number of words per T-unit, in compositions written by-adult- students of English as a second language. To answer this question, compositions were collected from eight classes of Advanced level students in the English Language Training Department at King Edward Campus in Vancouver. Each student in the study wrote eight compositions over an eight week period in the Fall of 1981. Two different topics were assigned in each of four modes with the topics assigned to class in random order. The compositions of those students who wrote on every topic at the appointed time (N=61) were divided into T-units, words were counted and words per T-unit calculated. The mean number of words per T-unit per mode was then determined for description, narration, argument, and exposition. Differences, in mean number of words per T-unit for six pairs of modes were tested for significance at the .05 level. The six pairs, narration-description, narration-exposition, narration-argument, description-exposition, description-argument, and exposition-argument were analyzed using a t-test for dependent measures. The results indicated that there were significant differences in W/TU between five of six pairs with no significant difference only for narration-description. The order of complexity indicated from these results was N=D< A< E. The order of complexity found in this study is similar to that found in other first and second language studies, in that argument and exposition were shown to produce greater syntactic complexity than either narration or description. Other results found in this study showed that a high proportion of students wrote "out of mode" when given tasks in argument and exposition whereas almost all subjects remained "in mode" when writing in description or narration. The results of this study showing syntactic complexity to be a function of mode of discourse suggests strongly that where complexity is a factor of consideration either in research or evaluation, mode must be controlled or results interpreted with the recognition of a potential mode effect.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.944
Threshold uncertainty score0.956

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.192 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it