Abstract
Two measures of syntactic complexity, clauses per T-unit and words per clause, were used to examine differences among four genres of text—narrative, descriptive, compare/contrast, and persuasive—written by the same two cohorts (83 students in grades three and five and 96 students in grades five and seven) on two occasions 2 years apart as part of a larger longitudinal study. For clauses per T-unit, a measure of subordination, significant differences were found between persuasive essays, which had more subordinate clauses, and the other three genres. For words per clause, an indicator of the denser syntax of the academic register, significant differences were found between descriptive texts, which had more words per clause than the persuasive essays, which did not differ from the compare/contrast texts. Over the grade levels studied, the measures of syntactic complexity did not increase in their differentiation among the four genres. The two measures of syntactic complexity were negatively correlated, especially for the persuasive essays. For text length, which is thought to reflect compositional fluency, grade, genre, and grade × genre effects were significant for both cohorts. Post hoc analyses found few examples of the syntax-level structures characteristic of the academic register. These findings suggest that although students could produce each kind of genre, their ability to do so may have been compromised by their limited knowledge of the syntactic structures required to achieve text-level genre goals. Researchers and educators should consider the syntactic- and text-level requirements for different school-based genres in designing and evaluating writing instruction.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Anglin, J. M. (1993). Vocabulary development: A morphological analysis. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 58, 1–165.
Bar-Ilan, L., & Berman, R. A. (2007). Developing register differentiation: The Latinate-Germanic divide in English. Linguistics, 45, 1–35.
Bates, E., & Goodman, J. (1999). The emergence of grammar from the lexicon. In B. MacWhinney (Ed.), The emergence of language (pp. 27–80). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Beers, S. F., & Nagy, W. E. (2009). Syntactic complexity as a predictor of adolescent writing quality: Which measures? Which genre? Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 22, 185–200.
Benson, M. S. (1993). 4- and 5-year olds’ narratives in pretend play and storytelling. First Language, 13, 203–224.
Berman, R. A. (2009). Developing linguistic knowledge and language use across adolescence. In E. Hoff & M. Shatz (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of language development (pp. 347–367). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
Berman, R. A., & Katzenberger, I. (2004). Form and function in introducing narative and expository texts: A developmental perspective. Discourse Processes, 38, 57–94.
Berman, R. A., & Nir-Sagiv, B. (2007). Comparing narrative and expository text construction across adolescence: A developmental paradox. Discourse Processes, 43, 79–120.
Berman, R. A., & Verhoeven, L. (2002). Developing text-production abilities across languages, genre, and modality. Written Languages and Literacy, 5, 1–22.
Blum-Kulka, S. (2004). The role of peer interaction in later pragmatic development. In R. A. Berman (Ed.), Language development across childhood and adolescence (pp. 191–210). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Carlisle, J. F. (2000). Awareness of the structure and meaning of morphologically complex words: Impact on reading. Reading and Writing, 12, 169–190.
Chafe, W., & Danielewicz, J. (1987). Properties of spoken and written language. In R. Horowitz & S. J. Samuels (Eds.), Comprehending oral and written language (pp. 83–113). New York: Academic Press.
Christie, F. (1987). Genres as choice. In I. Reid (Ed.), The place of genre in learning: Current debates (pp. 22–34). Geelong, VIC, Australia: Deakin University Centre for Studies in Literary Education.
Coirier, P. (1996). Composing argumentative texts: Cognitive and/or textual complexity. In G. Rijlaarsdam, H. van den Bergh, & M. Couzijn (Eds.), Theories, models and methodology in writing research (pp. 317–338). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
Connors, R. J. (2000). The erasure of the sentence. College Composition and Communication, 52, 96–128.
Crowhurst, M. (1980). Syntactic complexity and teachers’ quality ratings of narrations and arguments. Research in the Teaching of English, 14, 223–231.
Crowhurst, M. (1983). Syntactic complexity and writing quality: A review. Canadian Journal of Education, 8, 1–16.
Crowhurst, M., & Piche, G. L. (1979). Audience and mode of discourse effects on syntactic complexity in writing at two grade levels. Research in the Teaching of English, 13, 101–109.
Dickson, S. (1999). Integrating reading and writing to teach compare-contrast text structure: A research-based methodology. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 14, 49–79.
Duke, N. K. (2000). 3.6 Minutes per day: The scarcity of informational texts in first grade. Reading Research Quarterly, 35, 202–224.
Duke, N. K., & Kays, J. (1998). Can I say ‘Once upon a time?’: Kindergarten children’s developing knowledge of information book language. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 13, 295–318.
Englert, C. S., Stewart, S. R., & Hiebert, E. H. (1988). Young writers’ use of text structure in expository text generation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 143–151.
Englert, C. S., & Thomas, C. C. (1987). Sensitivity to text structure in reading and writing: A comparison between learning disabled and non-learning disabled students. Learning Disability Quarterly, 10, 93–105.
Faigley, L. (1979). The influence of generative rhetoric on the syntactic maturity and writing effectiveness of college freshmen. Research in the Teaching of English, 13, 197–206.
Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). A meta-analysis of writing instruction for adolescent students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 445–476.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1985). Language, context, and text: Aspects of language in social-semiotic perspective. Geelong, VIC, Australia: Deakin University Press.
Hillocks, G. Jr. (1986). Research on written composition: New directions for teaching. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
Hudson, J. A., & Shapiro, L. R. (1991). From knowing to telling: The development of children’s scripts, stories, and personal narratives. In A. McCabe & C. Peterson (Eds.), Developing narrative structure (pp. 89–135). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Hunt, K. W. (1965). Grammatical structures written in three grade levels. Research report no. 3. National Council of Teachers of English, Champaign, IL.
Hunt, K. W. (1966). Sentence structures used by superior students in grade four and twelve and by superior adults. Tallahassee: Florida State University.
Hunt, K. W. (1970). Syntactic maturity in school children and adults. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 35 (1, Serial No. 134).
Jisa, H., Reilly, J., Verhoeven, L., Baruch, E., & Rosado, E. (2002). Passive voice constructions in written texts. Written Language & Literacy, 5, 163–182.
Loban, W. (1976). Language development: Kindergarten through grade twelve. Research report no. 18. National Council of Teachers of English, Champaign, IL.
Malvern, D. D., Richards, B. J., Chipere, N., & Duran, P. (2004). Lexical diversity and language development: Quantification and assessment. Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.
Martin, J. R. (1989). Technicality and abstraction: Language for the creation of specialized texts. In F. Christie (Ed.), Writing in schools (pp. 36–44). Geelong, VIC, Australia: Deakin University Press.
Nippold, M. A. (1988). Later language development: The school age and adolescent years (2nd ed.). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
Nippold, M. A., Hesketh, L. J., & Duthie, J. K. (2005). Conversational versus expository discourse: A study of syntactic development in children, adolescents, and adults. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 48, 1048–1064.
O’Hare, F. (1973). Sentence-combining: Improving student writing without formal grammar instruction. Research report no. 15, National Council of Teachers of English, Urbana, IL.
Olson, D. R., & Astington, J. W. (1990). Talking about text: How literacy contributes to thought. Journal of Pragmatics, 14, 705–721.
Pappas, C. C. (1991). Young children’s strategies in learning the “book language” of information books. Discourse Processes, 14, 203–225.
Pappas, C. C. (1993). Is narrative “primary”? Some insights from kindergarteners’ pretend readings of stories and information books. Journal of Reading Behavior, 25, 97–129.
Purcell-Gates, V. (1988). Lexical and syntactic knowledge of written narrative held by well-read-to kindergartners and second graders. Research in the Teaching of English, 22, 128–157.
Raphael, T. E., & Kirschner, B. M. (1985). The effects of instruction in compare/contrast text structure on sixth-grade students’ reading comprehension and writing products. Research series no. 161, Michigan State University, East Lansing.
Ravid, D., & Berman, R. (2010). Developing noun phrase complexity at school age: A text-embedded cross-linguistic analysis. First Language, 30, 3–26.
Ravid, D., & Tolchinsky, L. (2002). Developing linguistic literacy: A comprehensive model. Journal of Child Language, 29, 419–448.
Ravid, D., van Hell, J., Rosado, E., & Zamora, A. (2002). Subject NP patterning in the development of text production in speech and writing. Written Language and Literacy, 5, 69–94.
Reilly, J. S., Zamora, A., & McGivern, R. F. (2005). Acquiring perspective in English: The development of stance. Journal of Pragmatics, 37, 185–208 (Special issue on Developing Discourse Stance across Adolescence).
Saddler, B., & Graham, S. (2005). The effects of peer-assisted sentence-combining instruction on the writing performance of more and less skilled young writers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 43–54.
Schleppegrell, M. J. (2001). Linguistic features of the language of schooling. Linguistics and Education, 12, 431–459.
Schleppegrell, M. J. (2004). The language of schooling: A functional linguistics perspective. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Scott, C. M. (2004). Syntactic contributions to literacy learning. In C. A. Stone, E. R. Silliman, B. J. Ehren, & K. Apel (Eds.), Handbook of language and literacy: Development and disorders (pp. 340–362). New York: The Guilford Press.
Scott, C. M., & Windsor, J. (2000). General language performance measures in spoken and written narrative and expository discourse of school-age children with language learning disabilities. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 43, 324–339.
Snow, C. E., & Uccelli, P. (2009). The challenge of academic language. In D. R. Olson & N. Torrance (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of literacy (pp. 112–133). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Stewart, M. F., & Grobe, C. H. (1979). Syntactic maturity and mechanics of writing: Their relationship to teachers’ quality ratings. Research in the Teaching of English, 13, 207–213.
Tolchinsky, L., & Rosado, E. (2005). The effect of literacy, text type, and modality on the use of grammatical means for agency alternation in Spanish. Journal of Pragmatics, 37, 209–238.
Tolchinsky, L., & Sandbank, A. (1994). Text production and text differentiation: Developmental changes and educational influences. In S. Strauss (Ed.), Learning environments and psychological development. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Tower, C. (2003). Genre development and elementary students’ informational writing: A review of the literature. Reading Research and Instruction, 42, 14–39.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Beers, S.F., Nagy, W.E. Writing development in four genres from grades three to seven: syntactic complexity and genre differentiation. Read Writ 24, 183–202 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-010-9264-9
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-010-9264-9