Text simplification and comprehensible input: A case for an intuitive approach
Abstract
Texts are routinely simplified to make them more comprehensible for second language learners. However, the effects of simplification upon the linguistic features of texts remain largely unexplored. Here we examine the effects of one type of text simplification: intuitive text simplification. We use the computational tool, Coh-Metrix, to examine linguistic differences between proficiency levels of a corpus of 300 news texts that had been simplified to three levels of simplification (beginner, intermediate, advanced). The main analysis reveals significant differences between levels for a wide range of linguistic features, particularly between beginner and advanced levels. The results show that lower level texts are generally less lexically and syntactically sophisticated than higher-level texts. The analysis also reveals that lower level texts contain more cohesive features than higher-level texts. The analysis also provides strong evidence that these linguistic features can be used to classify levels of simplified reading texts. Overall, the findings support the notion that intuitively simplified texts at the beginning level contain more linguistic features related to comprehensible input than intuitively simplified texts at the advanced level.
Get full access to this article
View all access and purchase options for this article.
References
Allen D. (2009). A study of the role of relative clauses in the simplification of news texts for learners of English. System, 37, 585–99.
Allen J., Widdowson H.G. (1979). Teaching the communicative use of English. In: Brumfit C., Johnson K. (Eds.), The communicative approach to language teaching (pp. 124–42). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Baayen R.H., Piepenbrock R., van Rijn H. (Eds.) (1995). The CELEX Lexical Database (Release 2) [CD-ROM]. Philadelphia, PA: Linguistic Data Consortium.
Biber D. (1993). Representativeness in corpus design. Journal of Literary and Linguistic Computing, 8, 243–57.
Brace N., Kemp R., Snelgar R. (2006). SPSS for psychologists: A guide to data analysis using SPSS for Windows. 3rd edition. London: Palgrave.
Carrell P.L. (1987) Readability in ESL. Reading in a Foreign Language, 4, 21–40.
Chafe W.L. (1975). Givenness, contrastiveness, definiteness, subjects, topics, and point of view. In: Li C.N. (Ed.), Subject and topic (pp 26–55). New York: Academic.
Coltheart M. (1981). The MRC Psycholinguistic Database. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 33A, 497–505.
Cohen J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155–59.
Crossley S.A., McNamara D.S. (2008). Assessing L2 reading texts at the intermediate level: An approximate replication of Crossley, Louwerse, McCarthy & McNamara (2007). Language Teaching, 41, 409–29.
Crossley S.A., McNamara D.S. (2009). Computationally assessing lexical differences in second language writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 17, 119–35.
Crossley S.A., Greenfield J., McNamara D.S. (2008). Assessing text readability using cognitively based indices. TESOL Quarterly, 42, 475–93.
Crossley S.A., Louwerse M.M., McCarthy P.M., McNamara D.S. (2007). A linguistic analysis of simplified and authentic texts. The Modern Language Journal, 91, 15–30.
Davies A., Widdowson H. (1974). Reading and writing. In: Allen J.P., Corder S.P. (Eds.), Techniques in applied linguistics (pp. 155–201). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Davison A., Kantor R. (1982). On the failure of readability formulas to define readable texts: A case study from adaptations. Reading Research Quarterly, 17, 187–209.
Dufty D.F., Graesser A.C., Lightman E., Crossley S.A., McNamara D.S. (2006). An algorithm for detecting spatial cohesion in text. Presentation at the 16th Annual Meeting of the Society for Text and Discourse, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Fellbaum C. (1998). WordNet: An electronic lexical database. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Field A. (2005). Discovering statistics using SPSS. London: Sage.
Gaies S.J. (1983). The investigation of language classroom processes. TESOL Quarterly, 17, 205–17.
Goodman K., Freeman D. (1993). What’s simple in simplified language. In: Tickoo M.L. (Ed.), Simplification: Theory and application (pp. 69–76). Singapore: SEAMEO Regional Language Center.
Graesser A., McNamara D., Louwerse M., Cai Z. (2004). Coh-Metrix: Analysis of text on cohesion and language. Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 36, 193–202.
Greenfield J. (2004). Readability formulas for EFL. JALT Journal, 26, 5–24.
Haberlandt K.F., Graesser A.C. (1985). Component processes in text comprehension and some of their interactions. Journal of Experiment Psychology: General, 114, 357–74.
Hatch E. (1978). Second language acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Hill D. (1997). Survey review: Graded readers. ELT Journal, 51, 57–81.
Hill D. (2008). Graded readers in English. ELT Journal, 62, 184–204.
Kintsch W., Keenan J. (1973). Reading rate and retention as a function of the number of propositions in the base structure of sentences. Cognitive Psychology, 5, 257–74.
Klein W. (1994). Time in language. London: Routledge.
Landauer T., McNamara D.S., Dennis S., Kintsch W. (Eds.) (2007). Handbook of latent semantic analysis. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Little D., Devitt S., Singleton D. (1989). Learning foreign languages from authentic texts: Theory and practice. Dublin: Authentik.
Long M., Ross S. (1993). Modifications that preserve language and content. In: Tickoo M.L. (Ed.), Simplification: Theory and application (pp. 29–52). Singapore: SEAMEO Regional Language Center.
Lotherington-Woloszyn H. (1993). Do simplified texts simplify language comprehension for ESL learners? In: Tickoo M.L. (Ed.). Simplification: Theory and application (pp.140–54). Singapore: SEAMEO Regional Language Center.
Magliano J.P., Schleich M.C. (2000). Verb aspect and situation models. Discourse Processes, 29, 83–112.
Malvern D.D., Richards B.J., Chipere N., Durán P. (2004). Lexical diversity and language development: Quantification and assessment. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.
McCarthy P.M. (2005). An assessment of the range and usefulness of lexical diversity measures and the potential of the measure of textual, lexical diversity (MTLD). Dissertation Abstracts International, 66, UMI No. 3199485.
McCarthy P.M., Jarvis S. (2007). vocd: A theoretical and empirical evaluation. Language Testing, 24, 459–88.
Nunan D. (1999). Second language teaching and learning. London: Heinle & Heinle.
Onestopenglish (2007). News lessons [online]. Macmillan English Campus, London. Retrieved from: http://www.onestopenglish.com (November 2011).
Pearson P.D. (1974–75). The effects of grammatical complexity on children’s comprehension, recall, and conception of certain semantic relationships. Reading Research Quarterly, 10, 155–92.
Perfetti C.A., Landi N., Oakhill J. (2005). The acquisition of reading comprehension skill. In: Snowling M.J., Hulme C. (Eds.). The Science of Reading: A Handbook (pp. 227–47). Oxford: Blackwell.
Rashotte C.A., Torgesen J.K. (1985). Repeated reading and reading fluency in learning disabled children. Reading Research Quarterly, 20, 180–88.
Rayner K., Pollatsek A. (1994). The psychology of reading. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Rosch E., Mervis C.B., Gray W.D., Johnson D.M., Boyes-Braem P. (1976). Basic objects in natural categories. Cognitive Psychology, 8, 382–439.
Salsbury T., Crossley S.A, McNamara D.S. (2011). Psycholinguistic word information in second language oral discourse. Second Language Research, 27, 343–60.
Simensen A.M. (1987). Adapted readers: How are they adapted? Reading in a Foreign Language, 4, 41–57.
Tweissi A.I. (1998). The effects of the amount and the type of simplification on foreign language reading comprehension. Reading in a Foreign Language, 11, 191–206.
Yano Y., Long M., Ross S. (1994). Effects of simplified and elaborated texts on foreign language reading comprehension. Language Learning, 44, 189–219.
Young D.J. (1999). Linguistic simplification of second language reading material: Effective instructional practice? The Modern Language Journal, 83, 350–66.
Zwaan R.A., Magliano J.P., Graesser A.C. (1995). Dimensions of situation-model construction in narrative comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 386–97.
Cite article
Cite article
Cite article
OR
Download to reference manager
If you have citation software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice
Information, rights and permissions
Information
Published In
Article first published online: December 12, 2011
Issue published: January 2012
Keywords
Authors
Metrics and citations
Metrics
Article usage*
Total views and downloads: 1717
*Article usage tracking started in December 2016
Altmetric
See the impact this article is making through the number of times it’s been read, and the Altmetric Score.
Learn more about the Altmetric Scores
Articles citing this one
Receive email alerts when this article is cited
Web of Science: 48 view articles Opens in new tab
Crossref: 42
- Mapping cohesion in research articles of applied linguistics: A close ...
- Yabancı Dil Olarak Türkçe Öğretiminde Sabahattin Ali’nin ‘Hasan Boğuld...
- Syntactic complexity in adapted extracurricular reading materials
- Predicting processing effort during L1 and L2 reading: The relationshi...
- Impact of Data Quality on Question Answering System Performances
- A Review of Parallel Corpora for Automatic Text Simplification. Key Ch...
- Textual complexity adjustments to the English reading comprehension te...
- Derleme Türk Masallarının Çocuk Okurlar için Değiştirilmesi
- Teachers’ dysfunctional feedback to students from immigrant and non-im...
- Approaches to simplifying academic texts in English: English teachers’...
- It's not just a phase: Investigating text simplification in a second l...
- Video‐blogs and linguistic simplification for students with intellectu...
- Rating Ease of Readability using Transformers
- Linguistically-Based Comparison of Different Approaches to Building Co...
- Accessible Communication of Corporate Social Responsibility: Developme...
- Pleasure Reading for Immigrant Adults on a Volunteer-Run Programme
- Lexical complexity in exemplar EFL texts: towards text adaptation for ...
- To simplify or not? Facilitating English L2 ...
- The relative role of vocabulary and grammatical knowledge in L2 readin...
- Okuduğunu Anlayamayan Öğrencilerin Okuma Esnasındaki Bilişsel Davranış...
- Predicting the Easiness and Complexity of English Health Materials for...
- Revisiting Second Language Readers’ Memory for Narrative Texts: The Ro...
- Applying Natural Language Processing and Hierarchical Machine Learning...
- Lore Vandevoorde, Joke Daems, and Bart Defrancq (eds.): New Empirical ...
- Optimal input for language learning: Genuine, simplified, elaborated, ...
- Syntactic Complexity in Adapted Teaching Materials: Differences Among ...
- Teletherapeia: Ancient Consolation in the Distance Latin Classroom
- Data-Driven Adapting for Fine-Tuning Chinese Teaching Materials: Using...
- Simplifying informational text structure for struggling readers
- Comprehension and Processing of Paired Sentences in Second Language Re...
- A Data‐Driven Approach to Text Adaptation in Teaching Material Prepara...
- Effects of lexical features, textual properties, and individual differ...
- The corpus of Basque simplified texts (CBST)
- Advanced‐Level Readers
- Authentic and Simplified Texts
- Analyzing Spoken and Written Discourse: A Role for Natural Language Pr...
- Predicting Text Comprehension, Processing, and Familiarity in Adult Re...
- Lexical Profiles of Reading Texts in High-Stakes Tests
- Sentence Shortening via Morpho-Syntactic Annotated Data in Historical ...
- Leveling L2 Texts Through Readability: Combining Multilevel Linguistic...
- The Role of Lexical Properties and Cohesive Devices in Text Integratio...
- Measuring Cohesion: An Approach That Accounts for Differences in the D...
Figures and tables
Figures & Media
Tables
View Options
Get access
Access options
If you have access to journal content via a personal subscription, university, library, employer or society, select from the options below:
loading institutional access options
Alternatively, view purchase options below:
Purchase 24 hour online access to view and download content.
Access journal content via a DeepDyve subscription or find out more about this option.
