Abstract
The present study complements previous diachronic investigations of linguistic features in English academic writing from a syntactic complexity perspective. Specifically, it investigated diachronic trends in the syntactic complexity of science research articles (RAs) over a time span of 50 years. Based on a corpus of 960 RAs published between 1970 and 2020 in Medicine and Mechanical Engineering, the syntactic complexity of texts from the two disciplines was assessed using multiple indices of global, clausal, and phrasal levels and was compared across the examined years. The findings show that the two disciplines participated to varying degrees in changes in syntactic complexity. Both disciplines displayed an uptrend in global and phrasal complexity, but the trends were more pronounced in Medicine. Mechanical Engineering showed a downtrend in clausal complexity, while Medicine changed little at this level. In addition, significant differences were found between the two disciplines in syntactic complexity indices at most time points, and the differences were more important in recent years than in earlier years. Possible explanations for these changes and variations in the syntactic complexity of science RAs over time were offered.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ansarifar, A., Shahriari, H., & Pishghadam, R. (2018). Phrasal complexity in academic writing: A comparison of abstracts written by graduate students and expert writers in applied linguistics. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 31, 58–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2017.12.008
Banks, D. (2008). The development of scientific writing: Linguistic features and historical context. Equinox.
Becher, T., & Trowler, P. R. (2001). Academic tribes and territories: Intellectual enquiry and the cultures of disciplines. Open University Press.
Bell, D. (2007). Sentence-initial And and But in academic writing. Pragmatics, 17(2), 183–201.
Biber, D. (1988). Variation across Speech and Writing. CUP.
Biber, D., & Gray, B. (2010). Challenging stereotypes about academic writing: Complexity, elaboration, explicitness. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9(1), 2–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2010.01.001
Biber, D., & Gray, B. (2011). Grammatical change in the noun phrase: The influence of written language use. English Language and Linguistics, 15(2), 223–250. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674311000025
Biber, D., & Gray, B. (2016). Grammatical complexity in academic English: Linguistic change in writing. Cambridge University Press.
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. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amu059
Biber, D., Gray, B., Staples, S., & Egbert, J. (2020). Investigating grammatical complexity in L2 English writing research: Linguistic description versus predictive measurement. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 46, 100869. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2020.100869
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (1999). Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Longman.
Bulté, B., & Housen, A. (2014). Conceptualizing and measuring short-term changes in L2 writing complexity. Journal of Second Language Writing, 26, 42–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2014.09.005
Casal, J. E., & Lee, J. J. (2019). Syntactic complexity and writing quality in assessed first-year L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 44, 51–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2019.03.005
Casal, J. E., Lu, X., Qiu, X., Wang, Y., & Zhang, G. (2021). Syntactic complexity across academic research article part-genres: A cross-disciplinary perspective. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 52, 100996. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2021.100996
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Erlbaum.
Deng, Y., Lei, L., & Liu, D. (2021). Calling for more consistency, refinement, and critical consideration in the use of syntactic complexity indices for writing. Applied Linguistics, 42(5), 1021–1028. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amz069
Gillaerts, P., & Van de Velde, F. (2010). Interactional metadiscourse in research article abstracts. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9(2), 128–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2010.02.004
Gray, B. (2015). Linguistic variation in research articles when discipline tells only part of the story. John Benjamins.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An introduction to functional grammar (2nd ed.). Edward Arnold.
Hu, G., & Cao, F. (2015). Disciplinary and paradigmatic influences on interactional metadiscourse in research articles. English for Specific Purposes, 39, 12–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2015.03.002
Hu, Y., & He, Q. (2023). A corpus-based study of the distributions of adnominals across registers and disciplines. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics, 30(2), 183–203. https://doi.org/10.1080/09296174.2023.2209487
Hyland, K. (2004). Disciplinary discourses: Social interactions in academic writing. University of Michigan Press. https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.6719
Hyland, K., & Jiang, F. (2016). “We must conclude that…”: A diachronic study of academic engagement. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 24, 29–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2016.09.003
Hyland, K., & Jiang, F. (2017). Is academic writing becoming more informal? English for Specific Purposes, 45, 40–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2016.09.001
Hyland, K., & Jiang, F. (2019). Academic discourse and global publishing: Disciplinary persuasion in changing times. Routledge.
Khany, R., & Kafshgar, N. B. (2016). Analysing texts through their linguistic properties: A cross-disciplinary study. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics, 23(3), 278–294. https://doi.org/10.1080/09296174.2016.1169848
Kyle, K., & Crossley, S. A. (2018). Measuring syntactic complexity in L2 writing using fine-grained clausal and phrasal indices. The Modern Language Journal, 102(2), 333–349. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12468
Lan, G., Lucas, K., & Sun, Y. (2019). Does L2 writing proficiency influence noun phrase complexity? A case analysis of argumentative essays written Chinese students in a first-year composition course. System, 85, 102116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2019.102116
Lan, G., Zhang, Q., Lucas, K., Sun, Y., & Gao, J. (2022). A corpus-based investigation on noun phrase complexity in L1 and L2 English writing. English for Specific Purposes, 67, 4–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2022.02.002
Li, Z. (2021). Authorial presence in research article abstracts: A diachronic investigation of the use of first person pronouns. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 51, 100977. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2021.100977
Lu, X. (2010). Automatic analysis of syntactic complexity in second language writing. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 15(4), 474–496. https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.15.4.02lu
Lu, X. (2011). A corpus-based evaluation of syntactic complexity indices as indices of college-level ESL writers’ language development. TESOL Quarterly, 45(1), 36–62. https://doi.org/10.5054/tq.2011.240859
Lu, X. (2014). Computational methods for corpus annotation and analysis. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8645-4
Lu, X., & Ai, H. (2015). Syntactic complexity in college-level English writing: Differences among writers with diverse L1 backgrounds. Journal of Second Language Writing, 29, 16–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2015.06.003
Lu, X., Casal, J. E., & Liu, Y. (2020). The rhetorical functions of syntactically complex sentences in social science research article introductions. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 44, 100832. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2019.100832
Lu, X., Casal, J. E., Liu, Y., Kisselev, O., & Yoon, J. (2021). The relationship between syntactic complexity and rhetorical move-steps in research article introductions: Variation among four social science and engineering disciplines. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 52, 101006. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2021.101006
McNamara, D. S., Graesser, A. C., McCarthy, P. M., & Cai, Z. (2014). Automated evaluation of text and discourse with Coh-Metrix. Cambridge University Press.
Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2009). Towards an organic approach to investigating CAF in instructed SLA: The case of complexity. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 555–578. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp044
Ortega, L. (2003). Syntactic complexity indices and their relationship to L2 proficiency: A research synthesis of college-level L2 writing. Applied Linguistics, 24(4), 492–518. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/24.4.492
Ortega, L. (2015). Syntactic complexity in L2 writing: Progress and expansion. Journal of Second Language Writing, 29, 82–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2015.06.008
Pahta. (2011). Code-switching in Early Modern English medical writing. In P. Pahta & I. Taavitsainen (Eds.), Medical writing in Early Modern English (pp. 115–134). Cambridge University Press.
Parkinson, J., & Musgrave, J. (2014). Development of noun phrase complexity in the writing of English for academic purposes students. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 14, 48–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2013.12.001
Pérez-Guerra, J., & Smirnova, E. A. (2023). How complex is professional academic writing? A corpus-based analysis of research articles in ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ disciplines. Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 20, 149–184. https://doi.org/10.35869/vial.v0i20.4357
Poole, R., Gnann, A., & Hahn-Powell, G. (2019). Epistemic stance and the construction of knowledge in science writing: A diachronic corpus study. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 42, 100784. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2019.100784
Staples, S., Egbert, J., Biber, D., & Gray, B. (2016). Academic writing development at the university level: Phrasal and clausal complexity across level of study, discipline, and genre. Written Communication, 33(2), 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088316631527
Su, H., Zhang, Y., & Lu, X. (2021). Applying local grammars to the diachronic investigation of discourse acts in academic writing: The case of exemplification in Linguistics research articles. English for Specific Purposes, 63, 120–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2021.05.002
Taguchi, N., Crawford, W., & Wetzel, D. Z. (2013). What linguistic features are indicative of writing quality? A case of argumentative essays in a college composition program. TESOL Quarterly, 47(2), 420–430. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.91
Wang, G., Wang, H., Sun, X., Wang, N., & Wang, Li. (2023). Linguistic complexity in scientific writing: A large-scale diachronic study from 1821 to 1920. Scientometrics, 128, 441–460. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04550-z
Wolfe-Quintero, K., Inagaki, S., & Kim, H. Y. (1998). Second language development in writing indices of fluency, accuracy, and complexity. Second Language Teaching & Curriculum Center, University of Hawaii at Manoa.
Wu, X., Mauranen, A., & Lei, L. (2020). Syntactic complexity in English as a lingua franca academic writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 43, 100798. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2019.100798
Yang, W., Lu, X., & Weigle, S. C. (2015). Different topics, different discourse: Relationships among writing topic, indices of syntactic complexity, and judgments of writing quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 28, 53–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2015.02.002
Yin, S., Gao, Y., & Lu, X. (2021). Syntactic complexity of research article part-genres: Differences between emerging and expert international publication writers. System, 97, 102427. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102427
Yin, S., Gao, Y., & Lu, X. (2023). Diachronic changes in the syntactic complexity of emerging Chinese international publication writers’ research article introductions: A rhetorical strategic perspective. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 61, 101205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2022.101205
Yoon, H. J., & Polio, C. (2017). The linguistic development of students of English as a second language in two written genres. TESOL Quarterly, 51(2), 275–301. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.296
Zhang, C., & Yang, J. M. (2020). A history of mechanical engineering. Springer.
Zhou, W., Li, Z., & Lu, X. (2023). Syntactic complexity features of science research article introductions: Rhetorical-functional and disciplinary variation perspectives. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 61, 101212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2022.101212
Ziaeian, E., & Golparvar, S. E. (2022). Fine-grained indices of syntactic complexity in the discussion section of research articles: The effect of discipline and language background. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 57, 101116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2022.101116
Acknowledgements
We are really grateful to the editor and the two anonymous reviewers for their constructive and valuable comments on earlier versions of this paper.
Funding
This work was funded by Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities, HUST: 2021WKZDJC013, Fan Pan.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendices
Appendix 1
See Table
4.
Appendix 2
See Table
5.
Appendix 3
See Table
6.
Appendix 4
See Table
7.
Appendix 5
See Table
8.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Yang, Y., Pan, F. Diachronic changes in syntactic complexity of science research articles: a comparative study of medicine and mechanical engineering. Scientometrics 129, 1663–1686 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-023-04891-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-023-04891-3