Cover not available

Article published In: TASK
Vol. 3:1 (2023) ► pp.109–139

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload EPUB
authorization required

Exploring task effects on register variation in second language learners’ writing

ORCiD logo with link | York University, Canada
Published online: 4 October 2023
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/task.22009.bar
Abstract
Task-based research often focuses on the main effects of task variables on measures of complexity, accuracy, and fluency of second language (L2) writing performance. This study aimed to extend this line of research by examining the main and interaction effects of task type, learner L2 proficiency, and L2 study on register variation in L2 learners’ writing. Each of 42 Chinese learners of English as a foreign language responded to independent and integrated writing tasks before and after nine months of English language study. Each essay (N = 168) was rated on level of formality and tagged for various lexico-syntactic features. Overall, integrated essays were judged to use more formal language and were more informationally dense than were the independent essays. More proficient students were judged to use more formal language than did less proficient students. After instruction, students’ writing became more formal, more informationally dense, and more narrative. The findings and their implications for the teaching and assessment of L2 writing are discussed.
Article outline
  • Operationalizing register control
  • Variation in register in L2 writing
  • The present study
  • Method
    • Participants and essays
    • Data analysis
    • Statistical analyses
  • Findings
    • Correlational analyses
  • Summary and discussion
  • Limitations
    • Implications
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (55)
References
Abrams, Z. I. (2019). The effects of integrated writing on linguistic complexity in L2 writing and task-complexity. System, 811, 110–121. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Anderson, M. J. (2001). A new method for non-parametric multivariate analysis of variance. Austral Ecology, 261, 32–46. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Anderson, M. J., Gorley, R. N., & Clarke, K. R. (2008). PERMANOVA+ for PRIMER: Guide to software and statistical methods. PRIMER-E.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Attali, Y. (2013). Validity and reliability of automated essay scoring. In M. D. Shermis & J. Burstein (Eds.), Handbook of automated essay evaluation: Current applications and new directions (pp. 181–198). Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bachman, L., & Palmer, A. (2010). Language assessment in practice. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Barkaoui, K., & Hadidi, A. (2021). Assessing changes in second Language writing performance. Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, D. (1988). Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, D., & Conrad, S. (2019). Register, genre, and style (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, D., Conrad, S., Reppen, R., Byrd, P., & Helt, M. (2002). Speaking and writing in the university: A multidimensional comparison. TESOL Quarterly, 36(1), 9–48. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, D., Gray, B., & Staples, S. (2016). Predicting patterns of grammatical complexity across language exam task types and proficiency levels. Applied Linguistics, 37(5), 639–668. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bui, G., Skehan, P., & Wang, Z. (2018). Task condition effects on advanced-level foreign language performance. In P. A. Malovrh & A. G. Benati (Eds.). The handbook of advanced proficiency in second language acquisition (pp. 219–237). John Wiley & Sons. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bygate, M., Samuda, V., & Van den Branden, K. (2021). A pedagogic rationale for task-based language teaching for the acquisition of real-world language use. In M. J. Ahmadian & M. H. Long (Eds.). The Cambridge handbook of task-based language teaching (pp. 27–50). Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Byrnes, H., & Manchón, R. M. (2014). Task-based language learning: Insights from and for L2 writing. In H. Byrnes & R. M. Manchón (Eds.), Task-based language learning: Insights from and for L2 writing (pp. 1–23). John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chang, Y.-Y., & Swales, J. (1999). Informal elements in English academic writing: Threats or opportunities for advanced non-native speakers? In C. N. Candlin & K. Hyland (Eds.), Writing: Texts, processes, and practices (pp. 145–67).: Longman. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clarke, K. R., & Gorley, R. N. (2015). PRIMER v7: User manual/Tutorial. PRIMER-E.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Connor, U., & Mbaye, A. (2002). Discourse approaches to writing assessment. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 221, 263–278. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Crawford, W. J., & Zhang, M. (2021). How can register analysis inform task-based language teaching? Register Studies, 3(2), 180–206. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Crosthwaite, P. (2016). A longitudinal multidimensional analysis of EAP writing: Determining EAP course effectiveness. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 221, 166–178. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Di Gennaro, K. (2009). Investigating differences in the writing performance of international and Generation 1.5 students. Language Testing, 26(4), 533–559. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ellis, R. (2018). Reflections on task-based language teaching. Multilingual Matters. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ferris, D. R., & Hedgcock, J. S. (2014). Teaching ESL composition: Purpose, process, and practice (3rd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS (Third edit). Sage.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Friginal, E., & Weigle, S. (2014). Exploring multiple profiles of L2 writing using multi-dimensional analysis. Journal of Second Language Writing, 261, 80–95. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gilquin, G., & Paquot, M. (2008). Too chatty: Learner academic writing and register variation. English Text Construction, 1(1), 41–61. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goulart, L., Gray, B., Staples, S., Black, A., Shelton, A., Biber, D., & Wizner, S. (2020). Linguistic perspectives on register. Annual Review of Linguistics, 61, 435–455. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grant, L., & Ginther, A. (2000). Using computer-tagged linguistic features to describe L2 writing differences. Journal of Second Language Writing 9(2), 123–145. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Halliday, M., Matthiessen, C. M., & Matthiessen, C. (2014). An introduction to functional grammar. Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heylighen, F., & Dewaele, J. M. (1999). Formality of language: Definition, measurement and behavioral determinants. Internal Report. Center “Leo Apostel”, Free University of Brussels.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hyland, K., & Jiang, F. K. (2017). Is academic writing becoming more informal? English for Specific Purposes, 451, 40–51. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Issitt, S. (2017). Evaluating the impact of a pre-sessional English for academic purposes programme: A corpus based study (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Birmingham.
Jackson, D. O., & Suethanapornkul, S. (2013). The cognition hypothesis: A synthesis and meta-analysis of research on second language task complexity. Language Learning, 63(2), 330–367. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Johnson, M. D. (2017). Cognitive task complexity and L2 written syntactic complexity, accuracy, lexical complexity, and fluency: A research synthesis and meta-analysis. Journal of Second Language Writing, 371, 13–38. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Knoch, U., Macqueen, S., & O’Hagan, S. (2014). An investigation of the effect of task type on the discourse produced by students at various score levels in the TOEFL iBT writing test (TOEFL iBT Report No. 23, ETS Research Report No. RR-14-43). Educational Testing Service. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kormos, J. (2011). Task complexity and linguistic and discourse features of narrative writing performance. Journal of Second Language Writing, 201, 148–161. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2014). Differences across modalities of performance. Task-based language learning: Insights from and for L2 writing. In H. Byrnes & R. M. Manchón (Eds.), Task-based language learning–Insights from and for L2 writing (pp. 193–216). John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2016). Functional adequacy in L2 writing: Towards a new rating scale. Language Testing 34(3), 321–336. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ling, G., Powers, D. E., & Edler, R. M. (2014). Do TOEFL iBT scores reflect improvement in English-language proficiency? Extending the TOEFL iBT validity argument (Research Report No. RR-14-09). Educational Testing Service. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Malicka, A., & Levkina, M. (2012). Measuring task complexity: Does EFL proficiency matter? In A. Shehadeh & C. A. Coombe (Eds.). Task-based language teaching in foreign language contexts: Research and implementation (pp. 63–86). John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nini, A. (2014). Multidimensional Analysis Tagger 1.2 – Manual. Retrieved on 25 May 2023 from: [URL]
Ong, J., & Zhang, L. J. (2010). Effects of task complexity on the fluency and lexical complexity in EFL students’ argumentative writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 191, 218–233. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Plakans, L. (2014). Written discourse. In A. J. Kunnan (Ed.), The companion to language assessment (pp. 1–13). John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Polio, C., & Friedman, D. (2016). Understanding, evaluating and conducting second language writing research. Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Qin, W., & Uccelli, P. (2020). Beyond linguistic complexity: Assessing register flexibility in EFL writing across contexts. Assessing Writing, 451, 1–14. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Révész, A., Ekiert, M., & Torgersen, E. N. (2016). The effects of complexity, accuracy, and fluency on communicative adequacy in oral task performance. Applied Linguistics, 37(6), 828–848.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ruiz-Funes, M. (2014). Task complexity and linguistic performance in advanced college-level foreign language writing. In H. Byrnes & R. M. Manchón (Eds.), Task-based language learning–Insights from and for L2 writing (pp. 163–192). John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shaw, P., & Liu, E. (1998). What develops in the development of second-language writing? Applied Linguistics, 191, 225–254. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Skehan, P. (2015). Limited attentional capacity and cognition: Two hypotheses regarding second language performance on tasks. In M. Bygate (Ed.), Domains and directions in the development of TBLT: A decade of plenaries from the international conference (pp. 123–155). John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2021). The psycholinguistics of task-based performance. In M. J. Ahmadian & M. H. Long (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of task-based language teaching (pp. 3–26). Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Swales, J. M., & Feak, C. B. (2012). Academic writing for graduate students: A course for nonnative speakers of English (3rd ed.). University of Michigan Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Weigle, S. C., & Friginal, E. (2015). Linguistic dimensions of impromptu test essays compared with successful student disciplinary writing: Effects of language background, topic, and L2 proficiency. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 181, 25–39. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yan, X., & Staples, S. (2020). Fitting MD analysis in an argument-based validity framework for writing assessment: Explanation and generalization inferences for the ECPE. Language Testing, 37(2) 189–214. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zhang, M. (2018). Collaborative writing in the EFL classroom: The effects of L1 and L2 use. System, 761, 1–12. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2021). Understanding L1 and L2 interaction in collaborative writing: A lexico-grammatical analysis. Language Teaching Research, 25(3), 338–359. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue